The Times Lead Story - Labour Set To Annihilate Women's Rights

[Arealnumber]

Labour to simplify ‘undignified’ gender transition process

www.thetimes.com/article/29648ec1-5b29-4b35-97df-2a443c71d7e0?shareToken=fd3bf0c5a080ae78044dd82770d8e1a7

So once again it begs the question what is the point? A special certificate that acknowledges someone's feelings in their head but does nothing practical?

I believe that it started off as being an administrative thing, for a tiny number of people who lead quiet lives etc, but then with the rise of the new and aggressive cohort wtih particular motivations, it has become weaponised into something of great value for trans activists. It's a document that can forever remain hidden that creates uncertainty for those who would like to maintain boundaries but are too intimidated to do so. It's sort of like an Trojan horse in invisible document form.

@Melroses yep agree to all that. I think though Labour particularly liable though because captured public sector/third sector orgs and staff see themselves as natural Labour allies. It will be an easy 'win' for Labour when the difficulties of, say, managing the energy transition without sacrificing living standards or controlling immigration without increasing labour costs become apparent.

Now is the time to show us though, rather than bets and finger crossed 🤞

I am thinking of it, but want to double check the voting rights first.

Well, no surprise but I think this is a huge fuss about nothing.
At the moment the process specified you have to "live in your affirmed gender" for 2 years. Which is nonsense as "living as a woman" for example says nothing.
Labour are saying you notify them you want to change gender, then there is a 2 year period before the certificate is granted. Plenty of time to get divorced, so that probably is why they are OK getting rid of the exit clause. Long enough to be a hassle for anyone just doing it on a whim, so should weed out opportunists. And it still requires a doctors diagnosis.

Worth saying the Conservatives aren't planning to repeal the GRA so it's all splitting hairs.

Lot of noise over nothing really.

The new shift of nothing to see here must start just after lunch.

@Clabony Yep!
Am I right in thinking there's a mumsnet tradition of discussing baking recipes when that happens? (Not that I will do so- I hate cooking!)

But the Conservatives are not planning on making it so much easier; and it is not just a case of getting a no fault divorce as you say.

The biggest noise deafening me, though, is Labour’s plan to not implement
what I consider to be a safeguarding policy regarding ‘gender’ in the the Conservative’s new school guidance policy; and the fact that the shadow education secretary seems unaware of what certain concerns actually are in the first place.

I am also deafened by the noise of what has happened to Rosie Duffield, and how Labour Women’s Declaration were denied a stall by KS. These are reasonable people worthy of respect who are not and never have been transphobes.

There are other noises, but enough of this for now.

Ha that old line still going

You can vote after three months of membership. I think it’ll take around that for them to announce the contest and go through the opening rounds.

Well it's been going on for years Eastern, old but true. Double crewed hey? How flattering.

I think you’ve got to skip past as no matter what Labour do they’ll just say great

You'd think they'd update their lines. Maybe to include how Very Sad they are they JKR said Mean Things?

Ha yes. How disappointed they are

Wes giving it sad eyes this morning apparently

Disappointed.

We're letting everyone down. All we need to do is be kind and be quiet!

THIS.

Also, I'm sick of the blatant propaganda that getting a GRC is 'undignified'. Getting an easyjet flight is demonstrably more undignified than getting a GRC.

Any woman having to see penises in spaces labelled 'women only', possibly with their young children, is far more 'undignified' and affects more people. Also is a safeguarding issue.

What about Dolatowski's child victim? Was the crime against that child less dignified than getting a GRC?

At what point do women and children matter, Phillipson, and how many have to be harmed before you're willing to place their dignity above indulging male wants you massive handmaiden.

"I'm not angry, I'm just really disappointed in you"

???

But it might not be the most advisable stance.

Haha
Are you trying to seed juicy information for data scrapers?
We don't hate trans we support women. We don't like the Tories but we don't trust labour. Hope that helps.

They are removing the right of a wife/partner to veto a GRC. Does this mean that becoming trans will no longer be cause for a divorce?

I was a Big Labour Activist. (Leafletting more than three streets at a time a speciality - just saying - for the benefit of the be kind volunteer)

This continuous fudge and failure to clarify is really pissing me off now.

I'd like to vote Labour, but being bullshitted endlessly and patted on the head and being told it'll all be ok, isn't the way to get my vote.

A spouse could never veto a GRC. A spouse had the right to annul the marriage before a certificate was issued so the spouse (in the case of heterosexual women) didn't end up legally speaking in a same sex marriage.

This is what they want to remove. An annulment can be a quicker process than a divorce and in some religions a divorce is not permitted or carries more judgement for a woman than an annulment.

@Grammarnut
No a wife cannot 'veto' a GRC now. it's just an 'exit by annulment' clause to protect her human rights. If she doesn't want to have her sexual orientation forcibly converted/ recorded as lesbian (ie by remaining married to a husband who says he's a woman), or her religion forbids divorce or same 'sex' marriage, he is issued with an 'interim GRC'. Either party can use this to apply for an annulment.

You can still divorce for any reason.

You can still divorce for any reason

Not for women from certain religions, no. This is a very important point on which the whole thing could easily turn, were there to be a legal challenge.

LBC covering this atm

Presenter doing very well but male caller giving away women’s rights and going on about ‘cisgender’ etc

Men doing this is so irritating

And hence Labour can come up with weaselly stuff about how the spousal exit clause isn't really needed any more because no-fault divorce is available now. But in practice, as PP make clear, it's not that simple.