For Women Scotland in Supreme court - thread 2

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5182666-for-women-scotland-heading-for-supreme-court

deleted by self - can't post the image I wanted to!

I'm sorry but... pigeons??

That kind of money could have:

• Saved 380,000 people's eyesight by treating tracoma, the leading cause of blindness, through Sightsavers
• Sent 44,300 malaria nets to people in need through the Against Malaria Foundation
• Saved and Rehabilitated 14,000 pigeons through local bird rescues
• Helped 1,700 people in poverty through Oxfam (who do lots of work to empower women)
• Given 1,200 children their full 2-year vaccine schedule in low/middle income countries through UNICEF

Just to put this in perspective.

EDIT - Nvm, I'm late to the party again

Damn. 36 pages of posts in less than 24 hours. I’ll never catch up.

Edited to add that it’ll be a whole new thread by lunchtime tomorrow.

Wow that drawing is incredible OP. I would actually buy prints of your work!

Great post from Red. Great analysis. Considering how Starmer has run away from this issue at every possible opportunity I do take some satisfaction that it's likely to be the bane of his life for the next 4 years.

Hmmmm, fond of the old Gish Gallop is RMW it would seem🤔

@RedToothBrush 21.10

but it is pure speculation

I have great regard for you

however I think this case is going to be the moment that women who have held firm hard and long, much longer than me, such as you

will get your reward for being totally right

even all the legal arguments from both sides were a massive tank through gender ideology.

Middle of the night musings, so may be wrong.

According to both sides if a person doesn’t have a GRC they remain their natal sex. Have the government institutions who issue government identification, such as DVLA - driving licences, and Passport Office, in a persons chosen but not certified gender actually been providing fraudulent or unlawful documentation?

For example IW has said they don’t have a GRC but all their paperwork says they are female. How if only a person with a GRC is permitted to do this?

I tried some parts and they seem relatively clear and accurate (95%); not at the level of youtube automatic cc which is indeed often word salad.
The few errors are easy to guess if you know the subject matter, which the posters in this thread do.

@Villagetoraiseachild

^Clarissa Pinkola Estes has said that every seven years women
(collectively ) have to fight again for something they had previously taken for granted.^

Figures.

@RedToothBrush

^And then, which will be the real problem whatever route it takes, is would a re-written EA that specifically says sex is biological, get through a Labour dominated HoC?

It's more likely to get through the lord's that the hoc imho^

Yes, I have developed a respect for the Lords over the past few years that I didn't expect.

Yes, that must be true. There's no way around it. Certificated sex depends on having an actual certificate.

This is an excellent point.

Does anyone know which specific law allows passports and driving licences to be issued in the opposite sex without a new (GRC acquired) birth certificate?

I don't know if there are specific legal provisions which allow them to do that or whether it's just their policy, but even if it's legal to issue the docs, the docs themselves are inaccurate/fraudulent.

Unless there is a law that says that they can do it then presumably it has to be illegal i.e. even if they have an internal rule that says it's OK, it's not.

This could get very interesting.

The SG has confirmed that only TW with GRCs are "women" (under their interpretation of the law i.e. that's as much as the law will stretch to, even if you squint really hard) and, after lunch, that the notion of "living as a woman" is simply that you have documents like bills, driving licence and passport saying you're one....

What if someone on the Passport Office or DVLA leadership team decided one day that we could change our date of birth by filling in a form on their respective system to do this?

This could presumably expose fraud at scale by the DVLA and Passport Office. Obviously if there is a law that sits behind it, that's not the case.

Getting documents like a drving licence with the opososite sex marker is the proof needed for living as a woman to obtain a GRC.

Yep.

But under what law can these documents be (re)issued with an opposite sex marker in the first place?

Which takes us back to the story about birth certificates, by law, not being allowed to be corrected/reissued for factual inaccuracies and mistakes - they can only be amended in the margin apparently.

Different for fantasies, though ..?

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/nov/19/baby-girl-registered-wrong-sex-mansfield-registration-office

Good point. Elo-Cane case already said that 'gender' could be used as a way to.identify people (on a.passport).

The documents are still inaccurate/fraudulent unless the legal authorisation says the issue is like issuing a provisional drivers licence, maybe? In which case their validity should be time limited and dependent on actually obtaining a GRC.

Indeed it does. That poor little girl growing up will presumably have to wait until she's 18 and can demonstrate that she's been "living as a woman", get a GRC and then her birth certificate can be changed.

Also, just thinking this through, it's possible that there will be a mad scramble where lots of TW (who currently have passports and driving licences with F in them) apply for GRCs. Under current law, they need to have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria as part of that application... but many of them openly say that they don't have gender dysphoria. There's only so far the public sympathy will stretch on this one before a mass peaking event unfolds before our very eyes like the Severn Bore....

TW with penises who don't have gender dysphoria who need a GRC to... oh.....

(If they open Reduxx at this point their eyes will fry at the realisation of what they have just learned)

I suspect the number of women who feel completely comfortable sharing spaces with TW is going to drop off a cliff. Women's Hour will presumably cling on to the desperate hope that all these women are Christian and that this is why they don't believe that the TW are women (I'm still pretty shocked that Darlington nurse was asked this question TBH).

(Still curious about that law... does it even exist???)

Sorry. Meant to quote this ⬆️

Question, hopefully not too confused. It seems that the judges have understood that getting a GRC is really easy, basically you just say you want one, and you get it. Can this weight on how they interpret the "original" meaning of the law, how it was intended by the legislators? E.g. if the legislators wanted certified sex=biological sex, they would have set up much more robust safeguarding?

I reckon this has changed in th past few months - I'm sure there was more on cross dressers, and now it seems a bit coy.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/gender-recognition/gender-recognition-accessible

'Unlike the gender recognition certificate (GRC) the issue of a passport in an acquired gender does not give legal recognition of the change of gender. For passport purposes, the question is only whether the person has permanently adopted a new identity.'