Read on Twitter
I’m at the Queering the Equality Act seminar. There are going to be 3 presentations.
Very interesting so far. Alice Irving, a queer barrister for disabled rights, is currently talking about the Taylor vs Jaguar Land Rover case. Most thought provoking statement so far:
Very interesting so far. Alice Irving, a queer barrister for disabled rights, is currently talking about the Taylor vs Jaguar Land Rover case. Most thought provoking statement so far:
(Paraphrased)
Alice talks about the fact that as the equality act already pushed away from a medicalised approach it might seem contradictory in the current debate that people assert that the gender recognition process is heavily gatekept&a burden to the trans community etc
Alice talks about the fact that as the equality act already pushed away from a medicalised approach it might seem contradictory in the current debate that people assert that the gender recognition process is heavily gatekept&a burden to the trans community etc
A criticism she has of the Jaguar/Taylor judgement is that though the judgement accepts we’ve moved away from medicalisation with gender they’re still focusing on a medical model of disability instead of a social one. They didn’t ask “what about the environment is disabling”.
As a disabled person I’m going to just say that we’ve suffered enough without people “queering” our protected characteristic 
Donnchadh Greene now, talking about C, one of the first transwomen to hold a gender recognition certificate. To claim her Jobseeker’s Allowance she had to go to the centre herself once a fortnight. Their information listed she has a GRC. They retained that information but hid it.
So access was limited for reasons of her protection.Similarly for people who are in witness protection although more commonly for trans people. The claim was people could infer through this she was likely trans, and she experienced distressing comments&incidents at the centre.
She felt the retention of this infor breached her human rights
Argument from the DWP that for the sake of fraud detection&pensions it was a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim
Lady Hale, at the Supreme Court, was compassionate but of course still criticised.
Argument from the DWP that for the sake of fraud detection&pensions it was a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim
Lady Hale, at the Supreme Court, was compassionate but of course still criticised.
Something that seems clear to me is that making transgender status secret for trans people is of great import for some reason
DWP continued to argue it was a legitimate aim.
Donnachadh wants to “erase the concept of rewriting history”
DWP continued to argue it was a legitimate aim.
Donnachadh wants to “erase the concept of rewriting history”
I.e transwomen are women and the state got it wrong to observe C as a male at birth so the onus is on them to fix it!
The “senior queer in chambers” is on next.
He needs NO introduction (yes he does guys)
Was involved in the gays in the military case.
It’s Johnathan Cooper.
He needs NO introduction (yes he does guys)
Was involved in the gays in the military case.
It’s Johnathan Cooper.
He’s proposing to look at what’s been going on in Strasbourg& a reflect on how the court there is approaching trans issues
He’s asking if the EA is keeping up with developments on trans issues.He says yes BUT there’s a lot we should learn from the European court of human rights
He’s asking if the EA is keeping up with developments on trans issues.He says yes BUT there’s a lot we should learn from the European court of human rights
He’s just said that he gets the problem with the word queer. And though he doesn’t mind being called it he completely understands why people get profoundly upset by the term.
He’s skipping over issues around gay marriage in other European countries because we are running out of time but isn’t this an inadvertent emblem of the whole debate where people skip over gay rights and where those are still lacking to get to trans stuff every day 
Jumping to the trans issues now. He says Strasbourg was very slow to get to dealing with these issues.
Talking about them finally recognising the importance of the *sex* of a post operative transsexual.
Now they’re recognising that a need for medicalisation is not necessary
Talking about them finally recognising the importance of the *sex* of a post operative transsexual.
Now they’re recognising that a need for medicalisation is not necessary
So people who didn’t wish to had to go through a gender reassignment surgery or they had to forego recognition.
With the conflation of sex and gender here, even at such an impressive court, it doesn’t surprise me how messy this whole discussion is.
With the conflation of sex and gender here, even at such an impressive court, it doesn’t surprise me how messy this whole discussion is.
GRA was a remarkable moment of its time but is now a dinosaur and should be revised.
If the government doesn’t force it, the courts will
If the government doesn’t force it, the courts will
He’s talking about gay men in Northern Ireland now.
It is fascinating to me that people who recognise the needs for protection of other groups within the equality act on the basis of sexuality dont see the problems with erasing sex entire.
It is fascinating to me that people who recognise the needs for protection of other groups within the equality act on the basis of sexuality dont see the problems with erasing sex entire.
He thinks the Tavistock case needs to be reviewed. The good bit of the case he said is that under 16s should have access to puberty blockers if they need them just with court input.
He just said, The rather brilliant Naomi Wolf has described that decision in such startling terms where she puts it into the context of the courts making personal decisions that are between us and our healthcare providers.
Now he’s suggesting the judgement is concerning because abortion rights could be harmed in a similar way If the state can get involved between a doctor&a patient.
No mention that the problem was the very fact there was no evidence base provided for blockers
No mention that the problem was the very fact there was no evidence base provided for blockers
So, really, the judgement protects children and young people from being subject to experimental treatments by the medical profession.
It doesn’t deny them access to treatments that are well regarded. And, in fact doesn’t automatically even deny them access to these drugs.
It doesn’t deny them access to treatments that are well regarded. And, in fact doesn’t automatically even deny them access to these drugs.
Alice Irving answering a question&being RESPECTFUL towards women who disagree with her on the idea that TW should be in women’s bathrooms.
She says there’s no risk to women. So doesn’t think it’s a proportionate aim to achieve a legitimate aim to exclude them
She says there’s no risk to women. So doesn’t think it’s a proportionate aim to achieve a legitimate aim to exclude them
but thinks an impact assessment would be good.
Um, can we keep her?
Um, can we keep her?
Someone asked a question that asked about the gender critical distinction between sex and gender. I got distracted by the postman so I missed part of what happened but Donnachadh is now talking.
(Also.....is it really gender critical to distinguish between sex and gender?)
He hasn’t addressed that yet. He’s just chatting.
He hasn’t addressed that yet. He’s just chatting.
Trans people are very vulnerable to media harassment and moral panic right now apparently.
Alice saying that gender identity can’t be conflated with personality and is in fact a distinct thing like sexuality.
“Pernicious tendency to say that if you’re self IDing into a gender identity its like personality”
She says they’re different in crucial ways.
“Pernicious tendency to say that if you’re self IDing into a gender identity its like personality”
She says they’re different in crucial ways.
She’s addressing the “gender critical take”
She says we can carve out the nuance that someone providing services can offer services with a same sex space without it discriminating if it’s proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim.
She says we can carve out the nuance that someone providing services can offer services with a same sex space without it discriminating if it’s proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim.
But she doesn’t think it’s a legitimate aim to “exclude trans people” &just a moral panic.
So this is how the more measured voices will tackle our terrible belief in male violence and need for female protection.They will say yes,you have the right,if it’s reasonable but it isn’t
So this is how the more measured voices will tackle our terrible belief in male violence and need for female protection.They will say yes,you have the right,if it’s reasonable but it isn’t
Now Jonathan is recommending Naomi Wolfs book. oh Johnathan why.
Back to the idea women can have rights when it’s reasonable but we’re being unreasonable,it really does surprise me how off that is
Can an intelligent barrister not see any situation in which she might consider it reasonable for women to want female only resources? Not even one?
Can an intelligent barrister not see any situation in which she might consider it reasonable for women to want female only resources? Not even one?
I like Johnathan. He’s back, and despite his terrible taste in books etc. He clearly dislikes being called queer but feels he must accept it and I hate that we are at the point where people have to endure things they find traumatic to be seen as acceptable.
Apparently Bristol university (I think) are holding an event about the Tavistock decision on the 3rd of March so that is one for the diary if it’s possible to attend.
Phewfff, so it’s over. And it made me kind of sad for several reasons but no one said “terf”.
Small wins.
Phewfff, so it’s over. And it made me kind of sad for several reasons but no one said “terf”.
Small wins.
