Why does this male person, Stonewall trans advisory group member, get coopted on to the Royal College of Obs and Gyne Womens Network where we get to advise doctors about the experience of patients?
Why was this male person, 10 years ago, already telling the EHRC how to talk about maternity?
What possible interest is it of Roz's, except that Roz wants the word woman?
Why did Brighton and Hove Hospital Trust ask this male person to review the language they tell midwives to use about their female patients?
How did these male people get the Government Legal Department and Parliamentary Counsel to tweek their own official guidance on gender neutral drafting to remove the distinction that this doesn't mean erasing sex where #sexmatters?
Why did those government lawyers go on to draft a law that banishes the words "women","she" and "her" from maternity legislation? mforstater.medium.com/pregnant-peopl…
Why in the name of inclusion are we told that the legal and dictionary definition of woman is not inclusive enough, if it includes all female people?
And another one chimes in.
Why on earth do they care so much about how health care professionals refer to female people going through the traumatic, dangerous experience of birth?
Does "stay in your lane" not apply here?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The history of sex and gender is that once you unclip from reality things unravel much further than the officials that did the un-clipping anticipated, and each place which is unclipped accelerates unravelling elsewhere
Proposed amendments leave out "person" and insert "woman"
@RachelReevesMP talks about If we are to encourage women from all backgrounds to become MPs and ministers - 102 years after women won the right to stand for parliament, there are still just 220 female MPs compared with 430 men
The first woman MP to have a baby while serving in parliament in 1976. She had to come into parliament 10 days after giving birth to vote.
It is being asked whether #MOMABill needs to say "persons" instead of "women" in order to include females who have legally changed sex to male
My answer: no ...
The GRA is a legal fiction which allows for look throughs - it does not mean other laws can never refer to the sexes
It is recognised that it is necessary for the law to refer to the two sexes - in particular in matters around reproduction, and in anti discrimination law (as well as regulations relating to sport, buildings, healthcare etc...)
For example the laws around fertility treatment are specified as relating to women and men (in their respective biological roles). It is obvious as obvious can be that this refers to the big gamete people and the small gamete people
In 2002 The EcHR ruled in the case of Goodwin that not changing sex recorded on birth certificate breached the right of a post operative transsexual to a private life, and that changing it for a tiny number of people would have no substantive harm to public interest.
In 2021 it is being argued that because the resulting law gold plated this to allow people to change their legal sex without slteration to their body we can no longer have words for the two sexes, or use those words to recognise biological sex in law.