European Convention on Human Rights

[JellySaurus]

ARTICLE 8 the right to respect for private and family life, and Article 12 the right to marry, are used as to justify the requirement for the UK government to legally recognise people as the opposite sex. (Redundant, now that same-sex marriage is legal.)

8.1 Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

But why is 8.2, which is not mentioned in Article 12 but appears in similar form in many other Articles, not used as an argument for removing the GRA from our law?

8.2 There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Enabling men to access female single-sex spaces has resulted in crimes: women and girls being assaulted and raped. Medical transition causes long-term ill-health. Telling children that they may not be the sex they are, or that they have to pretend that somebody is not the sex they are, is immoral as it subverts safeguarding. Multiple court cases have demonstrated that transgenderism illegally restricts the rights and freedoms of others.

Isn’t it time to recognise this?

So what about post-op transsexuals?

I am really sorry that you were sexually assaulted. I hope that you have good people around you to provided you with the compassion and support needed to recover as best you can. I am dismayed by the way the patriarchy enables males violence and abuse to occur at such prolific rates.

Transwomen are male and there is no evidence suggesting that the risks from males with trans identities are any different to those without.

I expect (and hope) that you would find the idea of being violent to women and girls horrific. The same goes for my Dad, partner, sons and male friends. In each of these instances, I have complete confidence that they won’t harm me. This doesn’t alter the level of risk I am alert to around males.

I understand that you don’t consider yourself to be male, I have no idea whether you pass or not [I don’t take your word for this as many transwomen who think they pass don’t]. What I can say, is that I do not feel any safer around transwomen than I do around makes without trans identities and there is no material reason why I should.

You've said a lot of things that are not factual, but
GCs relentless drive to embed discrimination in law
is a real humdinger!

Anti-discrimination legislation based on biological sex was brought in in the UK in the 1970s. So you think there was a 'relentless drive by GCs' in the 1970s? and that discrimination was 'embedded' in the very anti-Sex Discrimination laws that made it illegal?

It's from the same Trans School of Fantasy History that says that transwomen started the Stonewall Riots in 1969🙄

No, they are not.

Humans cannot change sex. Any more than any other mammal.

Conceived and born male = a man.

And artificially created breasts on a male body do not make that body female.

I don't believe in gender identity. And Gender is NOT THE SAME as sex anyway.

ALL transwomen are the male sex.

So I don't see a difference between transwomen and other males in practice. You are just all men.

As is my legal right of belief.

We can not protect sex based rights by replacing sex (which no one can change and is still retained, even if people believe in gender) with gender.

In law we have sex based rights so sex must be seen to uphold all our sex based rights. Sex based rights in law, also protect transwomen ironically. Without being about to see sex, transgenderism becomes impossible in law to define and identify. How do we know which humans are the transwomen, if we can't see sex?! Transwomen can't have legal rights to protection WITHOUT us seeing sex, even if we are trying to pretend we can't see sex.

I respect your right to protection. I do not think women should give up their rights to protection to accomodate your demands though. Your problem with men, is your problem to solve - its not for us to fix at our expense.

Third spaces are a sufficient compromise solution.

We've had the right to use certain spaces since Croft v Royal Mail. The EHRC is trying to change that.

I have the same fear of being SAd again as the cis women in my life. I don't think I pass because of what I see in the mirror, I think I pass because of the way strangers interact with me. Studies show that trans inclusion in bathrooms does not present any risk of harm to cis women.

I also have the legal right to believe that gender is what determines if someone is a man or a woman.

GCs have gone too far with the EHRCs guidance and there WILL be pushback when people realise how unenforceable and extreme it is.

What about them?

Legally they can't be treated differently to anyone else who has undergone gender reassignment without surgery. Surgery can not legally be a requirement for recognition of gender reassignment. Neither can hormones.

Thus the default has to be the lower point - any one who has legal protection for gender reassignment (this is NOT legally self ID btw) - who has NOT undergone surgery or is taking hormones.

So its an irrelevant strawman argument in practice.

Studies show that trans inclusion in bathrooms does not present any risk of harm to cis women.

Citations needed. From serious sources only.

Rejecting maleness - even accompanied by body modification - is not the same as being female. Looking and feeling female may make you more comfortable, I daresay it does, but the rest of the world doesn't have to go along with the story. If men have a problem with seeing men who look feminine in their spaces, that's something to take up with men, not a reason to impose on women.

Actually you don't.

Cos everyone has a biological sex, whether or not you recognise this or whether or not we recognise gender.

You can't deny sex - at some point you will need medical help in your life. Its always relevant and essential to your treatment.

Gender is irrelevant to my life. Except when it comes to reality deniers who insist that gender replaces sex, which it does not, is impossible and isn't a reflection of the law.

Basically tough shit.

This was in reply to your point about "anyone with a penis" which does not include post op transsexual women

Shouldn't governments and public organisations such as the NHS make policies based on facts? Single sex spaces are for the protection of biological women because of the fact that they are at risk of sexual harm from men and for reasons of their privacy and dignity; it's simply impossible to allow biological males and still have that same protection. I'm utterly in agreement that trans people should have protections too , and be accorded privacy and dignity...but there's a very simple answer to that, that of unisex spaces in addition to single sex spaces if trans people decline to use their birth sex to access appropriate facilities?

How? What makes them women?

A Supreme Court judgment overrules judgments of lower courts. Croft vs Royal Mail went to the Court of Appeal not the Supreme Court.

My body has changed sufficiently enough that i am closer to being female than male. My hormones change loads of things like my cancer risks, blood, etc.

Yes, facts. Like the fact that trans inclusion in women's spaces does not present any risk of harm to cis women as proven by studies.

GC have done NOTHING with the EHRC's guidance.

The EHRC guidance isn't a consultation process where anyone gets to give their opinion and then theres a decision reached based on feedback.

The EHRC guidance is a reflection of a legal ruling which looked at the original law in 2010 and realised that it was impossible for the law to work in practice if sex did not refer to biological sex - otherwise women, homosexuals and irony klaxon, though who have changed their gender identity lose their legal protections.

So if you want protection under the Equality Act you can only get it because biological sex is visible to law. Because transpeople aren't trans from anything if the law can't see sex.

So quit it with the absoluete carcrash in understanding what the EHRC can and can't do and what the law can and can not do.

Your legal illiteracy is amusing.

I can understand your fear. It’s entirely natural considering what you have had to face. I am sorry it happened and I am sorry that you are carrying forward the scars.

Many females carry the same fears and scars. Female only provision provides significant help in being able to participate in daily life. Allowing males to access these spaces removes this.

You need and deserve a safe space too. This shouldn’t come at the expense of females’ safe spaces. You, just like my lovely male family and friends, may not present a threat, but as a class, males do, and we can’t tell which do and which don’t. This is why we need female only provision.

Many female posters on this board can empathise with what you have been through and would support your right to have safe spaces free from male predators. What they are not willing to do is remove their own protections that come from excluding males. I can understand how and why this might feel to you like females are pulling up the drawbridge, because essentially this is what we are doing - but not without good reason.

Hardly. You've got a penis. Women don't have penises.

We've already gone through this.

This is delusion and medical illiteracy.

You can't change sex. No one can.

You are just arguing over grammar for the sake of grammar now.

Only men have penises. Only men can be transwomen.

I can not be a transwoman. Because I am female. Even if I decide to identify as a transwoman. Because biological sex.

How distressed do you think they're likely to be compared to women who see an unexpected penis in the women's changing room?

It's telling that you're very concerned about men potentially feeling distressed, but don't care at all about women feeling distressed.

Your risk of breast cancer is higher than that of men who do not put artificial exogenous female hormones into their bodies, but lower than that of actual women.

You still have almost the same risk of prostate cancer as other men.