Sex Matters to seek judicial review on BTP searching policy

[southbiscay]

x.com/sexmattersorg/status/1872368242012131505?s=46

Good news - gardening in order.

Also there is an interesting comment on the GRA:If we lose and the court declares that a GRC changes a police officer’s sex for the purpose of searching members of the public, this would strengthen the case for repealing or reforming the Gender Recognition Act."

And it's good to see this bit bringing awareness of the fetish that is autogynephila to a wider audience: "The High Court will be asked not just to look at the meaning of words in law, but to consider the concrete facts relevant to the case, including the facts of autogynephilia; the way systemic weaknesses tend to act as magnets for abusers; the impossibility of “passing” for most men who identify as women; and the abusive nature of deceit as to sex where intimate procedures or searching are concerned."

There are times when the union has helped write or inform the policies.

Is it the GRA that's created the protected characteristic of gender reassignment in the equality act? Would repealing it mean gender no longer protected under the EA?

I was all for repealing it but actually if we have clarification that sex and gender are different things then it doesn't need to be repealed. The EA is that you cannot be discriminated against based on a characteristic not that you get special privileges for being a characteristic? And as we are arguing to protect female and children's rights not for discrimination in where you can live/work/shop etc if you are gender different then it doesn't matter? Because sex is still protected.

Have I understood this correctly?

Gender reassignment (or something similar) was protected in the 1990s before the EqA and the GRA.

It would be just as difficult to get the government/the courts to formally agree that sex and gender are different because it opens up the question why a new birth certificate is issued. Its the birth certificate the TRA want, not the GRC.