Women's Rights and Rejoining the EU

[BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp]

(I posted this earlier on my Burnham and women's rights thread, but I think it's going to get buried there, so started a new thread)

Following Andy Burnham's speech, someone started a thread about what the re-entry to the EU should be called:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/eu_referendum_2016_/5584173-what-shall-we-call-the-return

Let's not rehash the pros and cons of Brexit here (there are plenty of other threads for that). There might be some economic benefits to rejoining the EU, but if women's rights get lost in the shuffle (and you know they would!), I don't want any part of rejoining.

I think it's unlikely, but, in case it does happen...

What I'm wondering is what would be the ramifications for women's rights in Great Britain and NI if (and that's a very big if) we were to rejoin?

Would there be any? Could anybody with legal expertise enlighten us, please?

I’m not sure there would be any. ECHR is separate.

women (like everyone) could travel and move to Europe more easily. Would it make a difference to cross border child custody battles?

Well there's this - which I haven't read in detail, but which makes it look as though it would be very problematic to repeal the GRA if we were in the EU, and perhaps, even problematic to retain sex-based services etc. I really hope not because I'd love to get back into the EU on most grounds, but we are ahead on recognising GI nonsense so it could be so.

https://www.ilga-europe.org/news/landmark-cjeu-ruling-demands-member-states-ensure-legal-gender-recognition-freedom-of-movement/

I should say, that appears to be a very partisan GI source, so it's possible that a neutral legal explanation would be less bad, I don't know. Bears looking into though.

I don't know about the CJEU ruling but the original ruling was passed as non-binding, so the CJEU ruling would only become an issue if Britain rejoined completely.

Several EU countries have self-ID, and if the borders were completely open, with employment across borders completely reinstated, how would that work for countries that do not have self-ID? Or would that not apply?

I have no idea, for example, how it works that Ireland pretty much has full self-ID, but GB and NI do not, yet the borders are open. Is this just never an issue, or has it just never come?

ed sp

Germany fines women for referring to men as "he".

I want no part in a law making body where one of the strongest members does this.

I’m with you op

It's not an issue. Ireland has self-ID. And we have unrestricted access. The world did not implode. Women did not cease to exist. The scaremongering came to nought.

I’m glad we don’t have self ID.

I believe a woman in Spain has been imprisoned for similar.

And you can be fined for complaining about men in your changing facilities and refusing to change with them at work

From the country that brings the world 'Barbie Kardashian'. Sheesh.

Barbie Kardashian is a perfect example of how fucked up Ireland is with self-id

What patronising nonsense. No one is saying the world would implode.
Single-sex spaces and facilities exist to allow women privacy and safety from exactly the sort of men who want to get into those spaces. Self-ID allows every man to use those spaces as he wishes. One of women's most basic human rights wiped out at a stroke.
And before any male supremacist supporter says they just want to urinate in peace (because they are frightened of the non-existent threat of violence by other men in the men's toilets) -- UK Ministry of Justice stats show that trans-identifying men commit sexual assaults more often than other men.
To get an idea how dangerous these men are, see the Transcrime site, which lists hundreds of convictions in UK courts.
https://transcrimeuk.com

That's not true.

You just don't give a shit about any or the women for whom it didn't come to nought.

The Muslim and Jewish women denied access to women only swimming. The victims of sexual violence too scared to use mixed changing facilities. The women left off shortlists because a man got the place they would have got. The goal who don't get to go to Guide camp because their parents don't want them sharing sleeping spaces with a teenage boy. And the rest

The world did not implode.

Actually, 'women' as a recognised social group did cease to exist in Ireland, as equality legislation etc is based on 'gender' not sex, and sex is not a protected characteristic.
There was nowhere near enough 'scaremongering' before the GRA was passed in Ireland in 2015, it was waved through in the wake of the Marriage Equality referendum with inadequate scrutiny as if it was all part of the same process.
It pretty much boiled down to the trans lobby saying 'This is what must be done' and it was done. Not the legislature's finest hour.

I'm guessing that it's because of the very small numbers concerned that there haven't been issues - it is an interesting situation on the island of Ireland.

The sooner the GRA2015 is repealed, the better.

unless the EU change their stance on self Id, it would be very detrimental to women if the UK re join. Our tiny island actually has shown some common sense in this area (thanks to the women bringing legal action)-we're not called terf island for nothing

Spot on!

Thanks! lots of comments - I suppose self-ID is just the first and most obvious issue, because it affects "women" as a distinct class (as @MarieDeGournay has said) but I'm wondering if Burnham has even considered any of the legal ramifications of rejoining yet. Probably not.

Honestly, I doubt Labour will get that far, but I wonder how far they would get before anyone even considered the impact on women in GB and NI.

I am still hoping there might be a few international legal bods on here who might have some pointers?? Anything really worrying about a possible rejoining of the EU?

(I'll take a look at the CJEU ruling thanks @fanOfBen and bear in mind what @FrippEnos has posted)

Who died as a result of Self-ID in Ireland? There must be hundreds, surely?

Then so did men. Clearly you're talking nonsense.

Absolutely agree with this. Any woman adversely affected is one too many. Paddy O’Gorman has been quite good on this. He did an podcast of interviews with women who are at sharp end, so to speak. Women who have been locked up in prison with these men. There are women who self exclude from women’s refuges too, because of violent men being allowed to use them. I suspect there may be quite a lot more going on but the MSM don’t, or won’t’ report on it.

The rate of incidents will trickle through eventually, and again even 1 woman or girl affected is one too many. Irrespective of how many girls and women suffer a detriment because of this legislation, others have absolutely no right to decide this is acceptable. Every single girl or woman who has been put in the position of being stressed, made vulnerable, abused, open to injury, or self-excluding from something has been made a victim because the state legislated for it to happen. Our TD’s voted for a new line of abuse against women and girls.

The Ladies Gaelic Football Association have a policy to allow males to play against girls, from 12-15 years old. That is crazy. Remember the under 15 boys teams who beat the National women’s soccer team in the US. For boys over 16 and men, there is some bs about the testosterone level and who have a ‘gender certificate’. A level of testosterone no woman would have (we know also that this system can be ‘played’ with as well), and it doesn’t alter their male bodies in any way.

I see there is a lot being spoken about ‘gender’ balance. There would be no way you could trust the figures of female representation as it could be a complete lie. If men say they are women and have their certificate, they could be counted as women, in place of women. You could have a 100% male representation on a board in Ireland (some men with their little certificates stating they are women), and they could call it ‘gender’ balanced. It is a level of gaslighting really.

You keep putting transactivists' wild claims into women's mouths, and it just doesn't work.

It's transactivists who shriek that any disagreement is literally killing them and that feminists want to stop them existing. I've never heard any feminist make those claims, despite the plethora of death threats hurled at women by transactivists.
See https://terfisaslur.com for more transactivist images of violence against women than any sane person would believe.

Similarly, feminists do not claim that people are dying as a result of self-ID -- although trans-identifying men have killed quite a few people>
See https://transcrimeuk.com for court reports and convictions.

Also, self-ID gives any man the right to intrude in any women-only space, which obviously increases the opportunity to stalk and kill women who are trying to hide from them.