1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

[Sat 28th Oct 2017] London Anarchist Bookfair (London)

Discussion in 'protest, direct action and demos' started by Kate Sharpley, May 30, 2017.

London Anarchist Bookfair
Start Date: Sat 28th Oct 2017 10:00 AM
End Date: Sat 28th Oct 2017 07:00 PM
Time Zone: Europe/London +01:00 BST

Location:
Park View School
West Green Road,
London N15 3QR

Posted By: Kate Sharpley

Confirmed Attendees: 0
You can not RSVP for this event...

This event has already begun, or has already passed; RSVP has been since closed.
  1. bimble

    bimble uber-hippy twonk peanut

  2. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    I don't agree with what happened to Helen at all although I didn't see the incident, and that is a brave speech although I don't agree with a lot of what she's said elsewhere about this. But it is a shame that no-one chose to point out to that meeting that the changes that have so far been proposed will have no impact at all on whether or not transwomen are allowed into women only spaces.
     
    nyxx likes this.
  3. bimble

    bimble uber-hippy twonk peanut

    That’s your response having watched her whole talk? She says that if it becomes demedicalised self declaration will make someone legally a woman and therefore they’ll have access to women only spaces. How is she wrong?
    (Typed before your edit)
     
    Fatuous Sunbeam likes this.
  4. FridgeMagnet

    FridgeMagnet Administrator

    That may be a new thing. IME they’ve just pretended that they didn’t exist, but I may not be up on the latest.
     
  5. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    There is an exemption in the Equalities Act which allows women's spaces to discriminate against trans women on the basis of proportional need. The all party Women and Equalities Commission recommended in their report this exemption be lifted and the Government rejected the proposal. There has been no indication so far they have changed their minds.
     
    nyxx likes this.
  6. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    That's simply not true. The government didn't reject the proposal (no. 12) at all! Rather, it said "We agree with the principle of this recommendation...", and that it was keen to take into account further representations to inform future policy discussions. You're being demonstrably disingenuous to imply that that this isn't a live issue of legitimate concern for women.
     
    Fatuous Sunbeam likes this.
  7. bimble

    bimble uber-hippy twonk peanut

    If smokedout had been there at Helen Steel’s talk he’d have corrected her, he’d be that guy with the 15 minute ‘question’.
     
    Thora and TopCat like this.
  8. sunnysidedown

    sunnysidedown Well-Known Member

    Is smokedout male?
     
    TopCat likes this.
  9. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    What they said more fully is:

    That is government speak for fuck off but this is just us covering our arses in case the political wind changes and this makes us look bad.

    It wasn't mentioned in the consultation announcement, and it would require changes to the equalities act, which is not what is being consulted on.
     
    nyxx likes this.
  10. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    Also should be noted that what was proposed was lifting of the exemption for anyone who gained a GRC under the 2004 act. If the process for obtaining a GRC changes then this becomes somewhat redundant.
     
  11. Sue

    Sue Well-Known Member

    What does proportional need mean?
     
  12. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    Well, that's your interpretation. One with which many women disagree. It's ridiculous for you to keep making assertions that particular measures definitely won't flow from the proposed changes (directly or indirectly), and to insist that, therefore, women are wrong to want to discuss the issue.
     
    Fatuous Sunbeam likes this.
  13. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    It is not ridiculous to suggest that self-identification alone will not change access to women only spaces, and that is the only proposed new law so far. That is just the truth.
     
  14. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    It's usually used to allow womens refuges and support services or people wanting a carer of the same biological sex to discriminate against trans job applicants or service users. It's a very simple process, they just need to make it clear when advertising the vacancy. It can of course be challenged in court if someone feels it is non-proportional but I don't think any claims have ever been brought.
     
  15. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    No it doesn't. If the new mechanism for receiving a certificate is contained in an amended 2004 act, the issue is still live.
     
  16. bimble

    bimble uber-hippy twonk peanut

    How is this done, in the adverts for these vacancies does it say ‘seeking cis woman for ... role’?
     
  17. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    I'm sorry, but that's utter nonsense.

    But, more's the point, it doesn't really matter what you or I think the proposed changes might mean; it matters what women think - that's why they have the right to discus it.
     
  18. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    That is clearly not what the committee meant though is it. No changes were on the table when the report was produced, I doubt for one second they thought they'd get self-identification through (and they haven;t yet) and it looks to me like they've fudged the issue. But the stark fact remains that the government said no to even this and have not given any indication they have changed their position. When the consultation is finally published, if it is ever published now, we will know if they plan to change any other laws, but at present all they have said is they will streamline and demedicalise the GRC process.
     
  19. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    How is it nonsense? It surely matters what the proposed changes actually are doesn't it?
     
  20. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    And unlike you Athos, for reasons I don't want to go into right now, I do have a personal stake in this.
     
  21. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    The government didn't say 'no'. I quoted what it actually said. Just repeating this falsehood doesn't make it true.
     
  22. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    Yes, but we don't know the specifics. We can't say what's not a possibility.
     
  23. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    Usually by having a little note at the bottom of where the vacancy is advertised saying this position is only open to xxxx under the terms of the equalities act etc etc.

    It can also be used for gender as a whole, or race in some circumstances.
     
  24. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    The committee made a recommendation, The government said no but we'll keep it under review. That is a rejection. That's how it works. Things are often couched in soft language and can be under review for decades.
     
  25. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    And?
     
  26. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    But we can say there has been no law proposed by the government that will change trans women's access to women's spaces.
     
  27. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    (my emphasis)

    So, it's still under review. Exactly my point. That's why discussion continues to be legitimate.
     
  28. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    No, we can't say any such thing. The proposed move to self-identification (instead of a medical test) will radically alter the ease with which someone can gain access to women's spaces.
     
  29. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    People can talk about whatever they want, but when a debate is so contentious then I'd suggest it's best to be accurate when discussing which changes to the law that the government has actually proposed so far. Unless of course you have another agenda and it suits that agenda to stoke up fears about these changes.
     
  30. smokedout

    smokedout criminal

    How if the exmption in the equalities act remains?
     

Share This Page