HoC debated on "Allow transgender people to self-identify their legal gender" - Monday 19 May 2025 at 4:30pm

[IwantToRetire]

For some reasons the House of Commons Petitions Committee have not listed this on the official web site of forthcoming Westminister Hall debates.

But seem to think a short tweet is enough notice! https://x.com/HoCpetitions/status/1922663793403855330

Again haven't listed petition url but can be found on https://petition.parliament.uk

And should be available to watch via https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Guide

Just in case anyone wants to lobby their MP to attend.

How suspect!

I don't understand the term 'legal gender'. Legal sex yes, because sex is a biological fact. But legal gender - I don't get it as gender is a made up social construct so what's legal about some made up bollocks it?

Or maybe you dont want your MP to attend if they are going to agree with the Petition!

Have just seen it is listed on the web page business of the day:

And will be chaired(?) by Dr Roz Savage Liberal Democrat MP for South Cotswolds https://whatson.parliament.uk/event/cal51896

The government already said they're not going to introduce gender self-id laws.

Do you trust them?

No but Starmer's not a fool, he saw the reaction when the Scottish Government tried this and will be staying well away from this. I bet he's well relieved with the Supreme Court ruling.

That's not the only point. This is about the democratic process that the HoC Petitions are part of.

And even if they are the Government they aren't the ones who decide on everything.

Not forgetting Labour may not last 5 years!

Given the number of people signing the petition is one indicator, the other is which MPs turn up to the debate and says what.

Alternatively that no one turns up and is a signal to the trans community that they aren't the priority they thought they were.

And MPs just aren't bothered that they have been banned from taking part in Pride and no longer feel the need to virtue signal.

Scottish Government tried this

That was because Scotland couldn't have a law that was different to other parts of the UK. Not about the issue itself. So interesting to see how many, if any SNP MPs turn up.

Although they made it less likely to get support because of setting the age at 16.

I bet he's well relieved with the Supreme Court ruling.

The Supreme Court ruling has nothing to do with this.

If anything it will be about changing the GRA and the process of getting a GRC.

Here’s the wording of the petition

“Allow transgender people to self-identify their legal gender.
We believe the government should change legislation to make it easier for trans people of all ages to change their legal gender without an official diagnosis of gender dysphoria.
More details
Transgender people have a history of major discrimination in the UK and around the world. Major studies in reputable journals have shown a positive correlation between allowing trans people to live as their gender, rather than their sex assigned at birth in regards to positive mental and physical health outcomes.”

Major studies in reputable journals - unfortunately many ‘reputable journals’ have blown their credibility out of the water by publishing paper after paper of unevidenced, self-referenced shite on this particular topic

While I was there I found this one too

Review how the rights of trans athletes are respected in sports
We call on the Government to commission a review into trans athletes’ participation in sports, looking at how to balance fairness and inclusivity, based on scientific research. Trans people face exclusion from sports at various levels. We believe this is a violation of human rights.
More details
We consider that policies often do not reflect the complexities of gender identity and the realities of hormone treatments, leading to unfair bans and restrictions. We would like a review to look at the merits of individual assessments instead of blanket bans.
The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) includes "rest and leisure" and participation ”in the cultural life of the community" as human rights. We believe that fair play is crucial, but that current policies can unfairly target and exclude trans people, particularly trans women.
Sign this petition2,199 signatures

one to keep an eye on. Good to know they care about fairness 🤣

It's a bit weird they've gone down this route. A GRC is as good as meaningless after the Supreme Court ruling. A man with a GRC still isn't allowed in women's spaces. And you don't need a GRC to have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment in the Equality Act.

Thankyou for highlighting IWantToRetire. I agree the comms issue makes it look like an attempt to sneak it under the radar; and getting a LD MP to chair it 😂 - we can expect an…. Interesting debate!

The petition was started some months before the Supreme Court ruling. And of course some are now saying they will challenge it.

That is why in one way this debate could be really interesting to see who if anybody turns up for it.

On one level the petition debates area as much about do MPs listen to memers of the public.

Given they’ve referenced the completely unrecognised ‘legal gender’ I’m not sure it’s a really thought-through strategy

I did a quick check on Roz Savage and I think see is fairly new MP and has been asked to chair by the Petition Committee of which she is a part, which could imply that no MP wants to be identified with the wording of the petition!

Given they’ve referenced the completely unrecognised ‘legal gender’

The legal gender is the usual misuse of the word, but is because the GRC gives a "legal sex" to those who have one.

But a GRC does not within the EA, mean that "legal sex" is the same as biological sex.

The Court ruling was only about the EA.

It will be interesting to hear what is said, especially what they say about what a grc actually does, ie what it provides to the holder.

For the time being there's no real danger of self id being brought in, but it's worth watching to find out who says what.

I remember that first Westminster Hall debate back in 2018ish when the only speaker against self id was David TC Davies, and mp after mp gushed about self id. So much has changed.

Maybe the Green Party will see this as an opportunity to should their committment to the trans community, and will be the only ones to turn up.

I am sure they would provide a very interesting discussion!

Manderleyagain · Today 19:23

“It will be interesting to hear what is said, especially what they say about what a grc actually does, ie what it provides to the holder.”

Yes, won’t it. I might not be able to watch it live, but I’m sure there will be women noting and publishing exactly who said what (although if only the LD’s and the Greens turn up it won’t be much of a surprise 😆)

I imagine the likes of Whittome will as well.

I see there have already been "briefings" to MPs about loss of trans rights https://www.attitude.co.uk/news/trans-legal-experts-warn-supreme-court-ruling-could-be-breaching-human-rights-in-parliamentary-briefing-483801/

🤦‍♀️

This was the government response back in March:

The Gender Recognition Act 2004 is a robust piece of legislation, with appropriate checks and balances that reflect the seriousness of changing a person’s legal sex. The Government is committed to modernising, simplifying and reforming the legal gender recognition process to remove indignities for trans people whilst retaining the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. We believe this strikes the right balance, and the Government will not introduce self-identification as part of these reforms.

The debate is to be in Westminster Hall - not in the HOC if that makes a difference. They are obliged to debate as over 100k votes but Parliament doesn’t have to do anything about it. They state that intention above… interesting they announced today for the debate on the 19th. Sounds like they want a low turnout - extra likely given I couldnt see instructions on how to attend?!

Bonkers as usual.As per the SC ruling a GRC will have no effect to equalities law.

Maybe apart from the fact that an employer will be prevented from saying to Bobina that the GRC you may or may not have, means i can not sack you for coming in to work in a latex pink mini skirt and a fishnet top.

Obviously i am making a joke to illustrate how silly it is.