Tag: Gender Recognition Act
On Monday 12 June, MPs met in Westminster Hall for a three hour debate on the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010. Last week we covered the debate in a general sense but left out the unbecoming behaviour that caused an uproar on social media as we felt it deserved its own article. Moss writes;
On Monday 12 June, MPs met in Westminster Hall for a three hour debate on the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010. A contentious debate that had been bubbling up for several months. Moss writes;
The point of this misunderstanding is entirely to set up the legal backing for the idea that it would be lawful to exclude transgender women from women's spaces. If you have to actually be legally registered as female to be protected from discrimination on the basis of sex and therefore misogyny then automatically the vast majority of trans women are locked out. Not to mention every transgender child given that the GRA is only for 18+.
Put simply; GRC or not, the law states that discrimination against transgender people is not lawful in the vast majority of circumstances. (Which I only add because single-sex exemptions exist, but have never been tested in law)
According to Stella Creasy and the GRA; you don't need to get surgery in order to have your legal sex changed in the UK. This is all factually true and the result of the law working that way means that yes; some women have penises. You can disagree, you can say you think the law is bad, you can turn yourselves red with rage about it. But nonetheless, as it stands, the law in the UK states that some women have penises - and in a court of law you would not be able to simply ignore that.
The untold damage to the psyche of those of us in the Section 28 Generation has yet to be genuinely explored; but it might explain why many of us in the 35-50 age bracket who now understand ourselves to be nonbinary watched in horror as the parliamentary “debate” on nonbinary recognition unfolded. A ghostly recreation of the ignorance, dismissiveness, whataboutery and speculative fiction that led so many of us to be left without any guidance or support in the 80s; let alone reassurances that there was nothing wrong with us.
So they sort-of debated the idea of non-binary representation, but mostly didn't. Instead opting to just do fearmongering and spread hateful rhetoric through parliament. Democracy! The whole thing wraps up with them patting themselves on the back for a job well done and deciding not to move forwards with any plans to include non-binary people in our legal system.
The judge noted that Sanchez had been in receipt of threats of violence and other inimidating posts on social media. However it was ruled that no actionable breach of duty had taken place, though the university could have dealt with Sanchez's complaints in a "much better fashion".
The need for queer solidarity really hit hard after the Government first announced it would not be banning conversion therapy at all. Then u-turned on that after backlash and subsequently announced it would ban it, but only for gay people. Meaning they would still allow people to attempt to torture the gender identity out of trans people.
It removes the need to have anything signed off by a doctor, it opens it up to 16 year olds and the wait is cut down significantly from 2 years to 3 months. Though it is still an arbitrary wait nonetheless which could certainly be improved by simply not existing at all.