The Trans Rights Debate

[ronaldo7]

A JUDGE has ruled that transgender women with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) can legally be defined as women when it comes to legislation that aims to ensure gender balance on public boards.

In her judgment on the second judicial review of the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act Lady Haldane said:

“The meaning of sex for the purposes of the 2010 Act, 'sex' is not limited to biological or birth sex, but includes those in possession of a GRC obtained in accordance with the 2004 Act stating their acquired gender, and thus their sex."

Last year, campaign group For Women Scotland took the Scottish Government to court over its definition of “women” in the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018.

The bill’s intention is to ensure that non-executive members on public boards are made up of at least 50% women.

Ministers had argued that people who were living as a woman or had gone through or intended to undertake the process of gender recognition could be defined as women within the legislation.

However, For Women Scotland argued that this did not accord to the separate definitions of women and transgender woman in the Equality Act 2010 and expressed fears about its wider implications for single-sex spaces.

The campaign group lost the initial judicial review of the bill in 2021 but were then successful upon appeal.

The Scottish Government then revised the legislation, which now states that the definition of “woman” is defined by the Equality Act 2010 and the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

The guidance states: “Where a full gender recognition certificate has been issued to a person that their acquired gender is female, the person’s sex is that of a woman, and where a full gender recognition certificate has been issued to a person that their acquired gender is male, the person’s sex becomes that of a man.”

In practice, this means that transgender women with a gender recognition certificate would be considered women under the bill.

But For Women Scotland were not happy with the revision and called for a second judicial review, the results of which Lady Haldane revealed today.

Lady Haldane's judgment states that while the Equality Act 2010 protects a person's rights based on their sex, the definition of "sex" is not entirely restricted to a person's biological birth sex.

Indeed, she concludes that the ability of a Gender Recognition Certificate to change someone's legal sex "does not offend against, or give rise to any conflict with, legislation where it is clear that 'sex' means biological sex."

In court last month their lawyer, Aidan O’Neill KC, argued that allowing transgender people to change their legal sex with regards to the Equality Act would “run a coach and horses through the preservation of safe spaces for women and single-sex provision for women under the Equality Act".

During debates in the Scottish Parliament regarding the reform of gender recognition in Scotland – which is set to be voted on by MSPs on next week – the Scottish Government has repeatedly argued that making it easier for trans people to obtain a GRC will not impact the protections enshrined for women in the Equality Act 2010, including those regarding single-sex spaces
But For Women Scotland stated that MSPs were voting on the gender reform legislation “blind” because it would come before the ruling on the judicial review, which was not expected to come until after MSPs had cast their final votes on the legislation on December 21.

Lady Haldane's judgment also made clear that it referred only the legislative competence of the Scottish Government in this specific case and should be considered a ruling on the broader rights of transgender people.

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A JUDGE has ruled that transgender women with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) can legally be defined as women when it comes to legislation that aims to ensure gender balance on public boards.

In her judgment on the second judicial review of the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act Lady Haldane said:

“The meaning of sex for the purposes of the 2010 Act, 'sex' is not limited to biological or birth sex, but includes those in possession of a GRC obtained in accordance with the 2004 Act stating their acquired gender, and thus their sex."

Last year, campaign group For Women Scotland took the Scottish Government to court over its definition of “women” in the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018.

The bill’s intention is to ensure that non-executive members on public boards are made up of at least 50% women.

Ministers had argued that people who were living as a woman or had gone through or intended to undertake the process of gender recognition could be defined as women within the legislation.

However, For Women Scotland argued that this did not accord to the separate definitions of women and transgender woman in the Equality Act 2010 and expressed fears about its wider implications for single-sex spaces.

The campaign group lost the initial judicial review of the bill in 2021 but were then successful upon appeal.

The Scottish Government then revised the legislation, which now states that the definition of “woman” is defined by the Equality Act 2010 and the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

The guidance states: “Where a full gender recognition certificate has been issued to a person that their acquired gender is female, the person’s sex is that of a woman, and where a full gender recognition certificate has been issued to a person that their acquired gender is male, the person’s sex becomes that of a man.”

In practice, this means that transgender women with a gender recognition certificate would be considered women under the bill.

But For Women Scotland were not happy with the revision and called for a second judicial review, the results of which Lady Haldane revealed today.

Lady Haldane's judgment states that while the Equality Act 2010 protects a person's rights based on their sex, the definition of "sex" is not entirely restricted to a person's biological birth sex.

Indeed, she concludes that the ability of a Gender Recognition Certificate to change someone's legal sex "does not offend against, or give rise to any conflict with, legislation where it is clear that 'sex' means biological sex."

In court last month their lawyer, Aidan O’Neill KC, argued that allowing transgender people to change their legal sex with regards to the Equality Act would “run a coach and horses through the preservation of safe spaces for women and single-sex provision for women under the Equality Act".

During debates in the Scottish Parliament regarding the reform of gender recognition in Scotland – which is set to be voted on by MSPs on next week – the Scottish Government has repeatedly argued that making it easier for trans people to obtain a GRC will not impact the protections enshrined for women in the Equality Act 2010, including those regarding single-sex spaces
But For Women Scotland stated that MSPs were voting on the gender reform legislation “blind” because it would come before the ruling on the judicial review, which was not expected to come until after MSPs had cast their final votes on the legislation on December 21.

Lady Haldane's judgment also made clear that it referred only the legislative competence of the Scottish Government in this specific case and should be considered a ruling on the broader rights of transgender people.

So MSPs will vote in the clear knowledge of the implications of what they are voing for.

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So MSPs will vote in the clear knowledge of the implications of what they are voing for.

Correct. All parties MSP's

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So MSPs will vote in the clear knowledge of the implications of what they are voing for.

It baffles me that even with that knowledge a majority of MSPs look set to vote for legislation that (to focus on
what was being addressed in the judicial review) will enable a man to change not just their gender but their sex on request.

On that basis how on earth can Sturgeon maintain that the new legislation will not confer significant new rights on anyone?

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It baffles me that even with that knowledge a majority of MSPs look set to vote for legislation that (to focus on
what was being addressed in the judicial review) will enable a man to change not just their gender but their sex on request.

On that basis how on earth can Sturgeon maintain that the new legislation will not confer significant new rights on anyone?

You do realise that it has cross party support?

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You do realise that it has cross party support?

Yes, bewildering.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, bewildering.

So will you have a moan about all the other parties?

[Stairway 2 7]

A thread from a paralysed woman who wants biologically female only care

https://mobile.twitter.com/hen10free...22204467351556

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So will you have a moan about all the other parties?

I've added my name to a letter sent by colleagues in education to MSPs of all parties expressing concern about the level of naivety being shown in failing to recognise the obvious dangers inherent in this legislation. We've focused primarily, however, on the fact it will enable those as young as 16 to change their legal sex rather than the threat to women's safety (which is what tends to command the headlines).

[Stairway 2 7]

Students block the screening of adult human female. Joanna Cherry says we have a neo fascist climate, but isn't it her party pushing this more than any other

https://mobile.twitter.com/joannacch...03707998167040

[He's here!]

https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfi...nder-divisions

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Students block the screening of adult human female. Joanna Cherry says we have a neo fascist climate, but isn't it her party pushing this more than any other

https://mobile.twitter.com/joannacch...03707998167040

Isn’t there two competing free speech arguments here? Aren’t the people protesting the screening exercising their right to protest? I’m not really on one side or the other but JC saying ‘is this what my country has become’ has me thinking I hope so. Two competing ideas out protesting each others views.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Isn’t there two competing free speech arguments here? Aren’t the people protesting the screening exercising their right to protest? I’m not really on one side or the other but JC saying ‘is this what my country has become’ has me thinking I hope so. Two competing ideas out protesting each others views.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But they aren't just protesting outside peacefully, they are preventing it being shown.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But they aren't just protesting outside peacefully, they are preventing it being shown.

Exactly.

I'm rarely remotely aligned to Cherry's political views, but she's never anything than spot-on regarding this issue.

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Isn’t there two competing free speech arguments here? Aren’t the people protesting the screening exercising their right to protest? I’m not really on one side or the other but JC saying ‘is this what my country has become’ has me thinking I hope so. Two competing ideas out protesting each others views.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They never challenged the ideas in the film by using their free speech they just censored it by not allowing people to watch it. Not sure that's the country you want Scotland to become?

Men telling women what they can and cannot do. Using physical force to tell women what they can watch and not watch. How very progressive.

[superfurryhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They never challenged the ideas in the film by using their free speech they just censored it by not allowing people to watch it. Not sure that's the country you want Scotland to become?

Men telling women what they can and cannot do. Using physical force to tell women what they can watch and not watch. How very progressive.

I've just watched some footage on Twitter, disgraceful.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Students block the screening of adult human female. Joanna Cherry says we have a neo fascist climate, but isn't it her party pushing this more than any other

https://mobile.twitter.com/joannacch...03707998167040

The film is freely available on YouTube.

https://twitter.com/PeakeCondition/status/1603305537688535043?t=8kKvHh_ormqqN9KP-34gmg&s=19


I'm not sure if there was due to be a post screening Q&A or debate, but anyone can watch the film.

[Stairway 2 7]

https://archive.ph/jEcWm

About two thirds of Scots are opposed to the central pillars of Nicola Sturgeon’s gender reform policy, according to a new poll.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The film is freely available on YouTube.

https://twitter.com/PeakeCondition/s...9KP-34gmg&s=19


I'm not sure if there was due to be a post screening Q&A or debate, but anyone can watch the film.

That's not the point though is it? Those who wanted to watch the screening at Edinburgh University were prevented from doing so by what appears to be a small number of folk who think their viewpoint entitles them to prevent opposing views being heard. 'Safety could not be guaranteed,' according to the university. Ridiculous - as is the statement from the university's Pride society spokesman claiming that a dozen protestors represent the views of all students.

University of Edinburgh film screening cancelled due to protest - BBC News

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's not the point though is it? Those who wanted to watch the screening at Edinburgh University were prevented from doing so by what appears to be a small number of folk who think their viewpoint entitles them to prevent opposing views being heard. 'Safety could not be guaranteed,' according to the university. Ridiculous - as is the statement from the university's Pride society spokesman claiming that a dozen protestors represent the views of all students.

University of Edinburgh film screening cancelled due to protest - BBC News

Nobody has been prevented from viewing the film if it is freely available on YouTube.

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nobody has been prevented from viewing the film if it is freely available on YouTube.

Ridiculous. A screening and discussion was stopped by people who disagreed with someone else's opinion. I bet the film has more viewings due to the publicity mind

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ridiculous. A screening and discussion was stopped by people who disagreed with someone else's opinion. I bet the film has more viewings due to the publicity mind

It's the Life of Brian/Jesus Christ Superstar effect. Those films got huge boosts in popularity because some people didn't see them and still objected.

The cynic in me thinks that the makers are delighted at the controversy.

I'm currently watching it, and have a lot of mixed feelings about it.... anything that Julie Bindel says has me reaching for sharp objects ..... but it's a view that is entitled to be heard.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://archive.ph/jEcWm

About two thirds of Scots are opposed to the central pillars of Nicola Sturgeon’s gender reform policy, according to a new poll.

Doesn't surprise me. Surprised it's not even more actually.

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's the Life of Brian/Jesus Christ Superstar effect. Those films got huge boosts in popularity because some people didn't see them and still objected.

The cynic in me thinks that the makers are delighted at the controversy.

I'm currently watching it, and have a lot of mixed feelings about it.... anything that Julie Bindel says has me reaching for sharp objects ..... but it's a view that is entitled to be heard.

What's behind your view on Julie Bindel?

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ridiculous. A screening and discussion was stopped by people who disagreed with someone else's opinion. I bet the film has more viewings due to the publicity mind

I did ask if it was just the film or followed by a Q&A but there was no reply. So that was cancelled but anyone who is interested can still watch the film, CWG being someone who is.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What's behind your view on Julie Bindel?

Her views on female sex work.

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Her views on female sex work.

I guess she's opposed to it?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I guess she's opposed to it?

She's opposed to men with testicles.

That may be my prejudices showing.

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

She's opposed to men with testicles.

That may be my prejudices showing.

I thought it was women with testicles...

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I did ask if it was just the film or followed by a Q&A but there was no reply. So that was cancelled but anyone who is interested can still watch the film, CWG being someone who is.

BBC report suggests it was to be followed by a panel discussion.