Trans former judge to take government to ECHR

[CervixSampler]

Trans former judge is taking the government to the European Court of Human Rights over SC ruling

I agree that the former Master is making such a fuss entirely for publicity and his own self aggrandisement.

How can anyone determine legally who is trans, or which trans people should be counted as the opposite sex? Many people would support carveout for say, fully surgically transitioned people, but I've heard it is a breach of international human rights law to give out rights only to those who sterilise themselves (and hasn't the german government been sued for 'forcing' people to have surgery to get new id?). Others would say 'passing' should be the criteria, but who assesses that, and it likely breaches some other laws to say a woman is someone who looks feminine enough (hard to differentiate from "female enough").Is it someone with a dysphoria diagnosis - I doubt that would be hard to get. Or as Brianna Wu suggested (as a criteria for minors transitioning) people who meet the old criteria for dysphoria which required more symptoms. The current movement is so centred on identity and self determination it is hard to see how to go back to old models.

He will get proper kudos from Irish transactivists too for taking on the UKSC. The praise! The parties! It will be Heaven for him.

My first reaction to hearing this news was ‘using what legal mechanism’ - I was worried I was missing something, with McCloud being a judge and all, but I just don’t understand any basis on which McCloud can do this. (I’m not a human rights lawyer so I’m not saying there’s no option at all)

As for the ‘anatomically female’ comment - McCloud has previous on that. When he stepped down as a judge he kept saying that, and that he’s at much as risk of rape as ‘other women’ (I saw it on a LinkedIn post but in looking for it now I’ve found a GB news report)

https://www.gbnews.com/news/transgender-judge-conspiracy-theories-lgbt-community

I find that comment / claim frankly disgusting - appropriating (for want of a better word) risk of rape through those ridiculous claims is just despicable. So I have very little respect for McCloud after those comments, and even less respect for all the idiots who liked and fawned over them on LinkedIn (including some colleagues/ people I knew who I thought would see how offensive that is. But no, must support trans people in any and all claims no matter how ridiculous, harmful, offensive or downright wrong they are 🙄)

I agree with @RedToothBrush and others, this is just another PR stunt or for attention.

However, the profit and publicity motive is key to the TA cause and that is one of its fatal flaws.

I guess. Although profit and publicity motives do work for a lot of other causes.

I'd say it's only a fatal flaw because of the real underlying fatal flaw, which is that it's all bollocks.

Someone upthread mentioned tearing up the whole Act. Why not just allow people to identify as the nationality they want to be, and get passports that way? It's a lot more tenuous as a concept than biological sex, it would save BILLIONS in immigration proceedings, and i could get myself a nice EU passport again.

Quite. And that's what will - should - stop this. And has at the SC.

If law can be based on the fantasies of the currently most fashionable, emotive and well marketed group, and the law is actually about suppressing everyone else and enforcing their participation in a service role in the fantasy - then wtf is the point of having law?

Frankly any civilisation that's reached that point thoroughly deserves to fall. And will, as Trump is demonstrating; a fed up populace can only be pushed so far.

It did.

It said that there was a problem with the GRA which now needs looking at.

Ironically so far to date, I've not heard Labour comment on it. Probably because they know that the only option here is repeal. And they won't want to do anything until forced because they don't want to look like the bad guys.

I've also not seen anyone else properly address this point. It is now the elephant in the room.

Any court case is going to ultimately come up with the same conclusion. The GRA and the Equality Act can not coexist in their present form.

The problem for TRAs is that the GRA also can't effectively coexist with other laws once you start to scratch the surface. It would undermine vouyerism laws if allowed to stand and I would argue that the way some want to interpret it raises questions about sex by deception (lesbians - where does the deception start?).

The Equality Act can stand as it does - the issue of privacy HAS to be treated in a different way because we acknowledge that if sex is a protected characteristic and males/females have a right to privacy based on sex this applies to ALL not just those who have transitioned. Privacy isn't the singular solution that TRAs seem to think here.

The fact McCloud has teamed up with Maugham is actually amusing. It really does show him up to be a grifter to anyone paying attention.

I'm guessing if you have lost your career over your activism, financial opportunities in your chosen field of activism probably aren't too common.

The ECHR route amuses me a lot. It's time consuming - nothing will hit court before 2028 at the earliest and it's only likely to result long term in an exit from the ECHR. The fact none of these idiots can see this is quite astonishing.

It absolutely is.

It was why McCloud left the judiciary. He was up front about it.

I reckon he is expecting the 24 hour cycle will forget he made such declarations that gave people with transgender identities false hope. After all, Fae - a raving misogynist and extreme porn campaigner including lowering age for porn actors, Tatchell - so much, Chappell - a slight increase in deaths in women is acceptable, and so many other male people heavily invested in this type of activism who get platforms because people forget their background.

McCloud is just building their profile. As we can see on another thread at the moment, McCloud is wrongly giving hope and emboldening the darvo abuse to continue. But McCloud will still be platformed .

Don’t forget Whittle.

Many people misuse the term rights when they mean privileges because often what they claim is a right is not a ‘human right’.

Don’t forget Whittle.

i can so much easier understand men as misogynists, but women will always baffle me.

Has to be something weird in Whittle's background.

Out manlinessing the men would be one place to start. Hide amongst the dross because going against the tide will highlight that Whittle is female.

This is problematic but also when can we stop using incorrect pronouns?

The whole edifice is straining. How can we have the clarity of the Supreme Court ruling on what woman includes but still have incorrect language

Yes, just keep pushing and pushing until you eventually reach the edge or until you implode.

That would be total suicide for any government that attempted to do it.

Is this ploy, talking about ECHR, also one that will keep stonewall going for just that little bit longer? They can get in on the grift and try for relevance again?

Yes, the idea that in the good old days transsexuals were not like those of today is just nonsense. The same root causes and motivations for transition have always been the same.

In reality, no one is transgender, so why would a government need to decide who is trans and who isn't? Everyone is either male or female. How someone chooses to present themselves doesn't change that. Also, that's not why the GRA was introduced.

Sorry if this has been said already upthread but Colin Wynter KC has commented that the ECHR cannot overrule the SC decision. It is not their job to dictate how the UKSC interprets UK legislation. The only thing they could do is to state that the EA2010 is incompatible with the Convention. If this happened the UK government would then have to decide whether or not it wanted to amend the EA or introduce new legislation which would “fix” the problem (i.e throw women under the bus).

x.com/QcWynter/status/1913574465633493123

The real issue is not which toilets people will use, but the fact that the mantra TWAW has been blown out of the water...the whole thing has been deconstructed. Gender and Sex are not the same thing at all, and they never have been. That is the real reason for the meltdowns that are currently happening.

Yes, I've noticved that...transmen are now being put front and centre as some kind of shield.

Kathleen Stock actually has the most classically beautiful, quite fine boned and 'feminine' face anyway.

God knows how transactivists are going to persuade people over the next however many years it will take to address the equality act, that they are in the right.

So far they're threatening to kill people and pissing all over London.

@RedToothBrush Ironically so far to date, I've not heard Labour comment on it. Probably because they know that the only option here is repeal. And they won't want to do anything until forced because they don't want to look like the bad guys.

I don't think repeal is the only option - it might be possible, if fiddly, to untangle the sex/gender fudge in the GRA, so you can have your gender recognised, but your sex remains the same, although that'd require lots of other decisions about what was recorded on different forms of ID, and who was allowed to require you to disclose your sex rather then your gender. And there needs to be a proper process for detransitioners. But I agree, anything less than the status quo is going to be greeted with howls of anguish that their rights are being rolled back, so none of the MPs will want to touch it with a bargepole.