ChatterBank10 mins ago
Trans Certificates
23 Answers
Does the recent ruling that women are women and men are men render the gender recognition certificates some trans people hold void - and will any changes made to birth certificates etc now have to be reversed?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
According to the internet
No, generally, Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) are not void. They remain valid for the purposes of legally changing the sex on a birth certificate and other official documents. However, recent developments, particularly regarding the definition of "woman" under the Equality Act, have raised questions about their broader implications, especially in relation to accessing single-sex spaces.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
GRCs and Legal Gender:
GRCs are documents that formally change a person's sex for legal purposes, as defined by the Gender Recognition Act 2004.
Validity of GRCs:
While the core function of GRCs – changing the sex on official documents – remains valid, there have been discussions about their legal standing in relation to other laws, particularly the Equality Act.
Equality Act and Single-Sex Spaces:
The UK Supreme Court's ruling that the definition of "woman" in the Equality Act is based on biological sex has sparked debate about whether GRCs allow transgender women to access single-sex spaces.
No Blanket Voiding:
There has been no official statement or legislation voiding GRCs. They are still recognized as legal documents for the purpose of changing a person's legal sex.
Ongoing Debate:
The debate surrounding GRCs and their implications for transgender rights continues, particularly in relation to access to single-sex spaces and other aspects of the Equality Act.
"There has been no official statement or legislation voiding GRCs. They are still recognized as legal documents for the purpose of changing a person's legal sex. " - but surely if the law has decided that biological sex is immutable you can't change sez legally. Those docs are unnecessary at best and probably fraudulent. Sex at birth is still what is the legal sex, surely?? It makes no sense otherwise.
the courts have not "decided that biological sex is immutable". they have ruled that the provisions concerning women in the equality act concern biological women as opposed to those who identify as women. that does not mean GRCs are invalid and they also ruled that gender identity remains a protected characteristic i.e. that you can't fire people for it or deny them services (but you can deny them access to single-sex spaces)
my understanding was that the goal of this whole court case was to "protect" women's spaces from transgender women. you won, you got it. so why now is the goal suddenly to strip trans people of GRCs as well?
could it be that this was never in fact about protecting women at all and was in fact an ideological crusade against the right of transgender people to exist? surely not!
10:15 they are fight one against us.
https:/
I'm sick of seeing dockers in drag walking about like they are the sugar plum fairy and expecting to be taken seriously.
Of course we are now in the position that people with beards and deep voices, calling themselves by a man's name will now be using the ladies' toilets and changing rooms as that person claims to be born female; people in frocks with boobs on show will be in the mens' claiming to be born a man.
Not ideal, is it?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.