For Women Scotland in Supreme court - thread 2

[ArabellaScott]

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

WTF that's ridiculous.

Schools can't use the EA single sex exceptions and let also in boys (or girls if single sex male) because minors can't have a GRC, is my reading of it.

This is such an important point.
Where is/will be the burden of proof?

I believe it was: 'iIt's not defined in statute, I believe there is some guidance, which I don't have to hand and anyway my argument doesn't rest on it so let's move on oh look a squirrel.'

The TRA who was live-blogging came out with some woolly nonsense the ECHR apparently defined about living as your authentic self, which wasn't what the question was about. It's not a question with a circular answer. How can a man live as a "woman"? What makes it so?

Deleted.
I must learn to read properly!

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

This won’t go away - it can’t - it will just become more farcical until several big events bring people to their senses and back to reality.

One of the female judges mentioned "chilling effect" in a similar scenario so she at least understands that it constrains service providers who want to protect women.

Can I check something I'm unclear on. You can't ask someone if they have GRC? Why not? Even if I'm a service provider trying to sort out a changing room issue? Why can't I ask? I'm so glad I'm not responsible for anything like this. I'd be freaking out right now - it's so unclear.

That has always been my reading of the law too - have never understood the blurring of this by schools, frankly.

Hopefully it might give rise to some robust challenges if it's clear in a SC judgment that minor boys are not covered.

The rule was created for the largely-fictional scenario of "a woman who's really a man, but that's a secret". So the GRC revelation was supposed to then cause the revelation "this 'woman' is really male".

It was made for 'Hayley from Coronation St' a propaganda character who appeared in the show for the first time in 1998, 6 years before the GRA.

Hayley, played by a female actress, was most people's only exposure to the concept of women who are secretly men. With the benefit of hindsight I don't think the decision to run with this storyline in the show was accidental nor was the way Hayley was portrayed in the show.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/2022/guidance-separate-and-single-sex-service-providers-equality-act-sex-and-gender-reassignment-exceptions.pdf

This is a useful document when it comes to advice on something like changing rooms. As it shows on pg 11 you don’t need information on who has a Gender Recognition Certificate to make a policy as long it is proportionate and justified. It can apply across the board.

Associations (over 25) are not covered in the same way hence the problem.

How can sex be private information? It's completely obvious in almost everyone; if you want to obscure yours, you have to go to quite considerable lengths and you probably still won't 100% succeed. Everyone who's ever seen or heard me can tell I'm female; what's so sensitive about it?

You can ask to see a birth certificate, which can only be changed if a GRC has been issued, so it's a sort of proxy for sight of a GRC.
In practice, though, your average high street business or sales assistant isn't going to ask - assuming they even know that they can.

This is a useful document when it comes to advice on something like changing rooms. As it shows on pg 11 you don’t need information on who has a Gender Recognition Certificate to make a policy as long it is proportionate and justified. It can apply across the board.

But whether it is proportionate or justified is ultimately only decided when someone takes you to court. And the guidelines used to imply that it was unlikely that most cases would meet that standard.

Hayley, played by a female actress, was most people's only exposure to the concept of women who are secretly men. With the benefit of hindsight I don't think the decision to run with this storyline in the show was accidental nor was the way Hayley was portrayed in the show.

No, especially when you look at the history of trans rights activism in the U.K. and what was going on legally at the time.

Seems to me we all need ID cards which anyone can ask to see. They need three markers. Sex and Gender Self ID and Legal Gender ID. The second 2 being optional. Then these pieces of legislation need amending to reflect what they actually mean. Or we could just repeal the GRA..... I really don't see the purpose of Gender, legal or self ID, in law. What actual purpose does it serve other than to give Men access to places they have no business being.

i think you'd have to apply the "Life of Brian" solution where we all agree that they are a woman and can have a smear test but they can't actually have one (so in Brian the suggestion was that they agree Loretta is a woman and therefore can have a baby if she wants but practically that can never happen)

Yes, but there is no ruling yet. I presume the judges do not have to agree with either the appellants or the respondents, but can make their own inter of the law?

Yes, but there is no ruling yet. I presume the judges do not have to agree with either the appellants or the respondents, but can make their own inter of the law?

I don't see how they can remake the law completely so that the EA sex category covers those without a GRC. That's not the point at issue in this case, which is whether the legal sex category of female was intended to apply to males with a GRC. That would definitely be for parliament.

I think it is highly unlikely that would happen. Neither side disputes that without a GRC you remain your natal sex. There is nothing in the legislation that would allow the SC to come to a different conclusion. If you could change your sex without a GRC then why legislate for GRC in the first place? GRC were established to get around the lack of same sex marriage so you can’t change sex without one otherwise they wouldn’t have been needed to solve the problem.

I remember watching that storyline many years ago and I don't remember anything much political about it (although I was maybe 12 so my political awareness was minus several politikks). Have you got examples of how it wasn't coincidental? I'm not trying to sealion, it's just it came across as a fairly inert storyline at the time and like they just wanted a big reveal for ratings that month.

I don't think a GRC was originally intended to be used use face to face or to give physical access to a changing room. It was supposed to be a piece of documentation that could change other documents like the birth certificate and to let people who transitioned get married to someone of their birth sex before same-sex marriage was allowed.

You were supposed to have "transitioned" and be living your life as the other sex, your past was supposed to be a secret. People weren't expected to need to know.

Wonderful.