Written evidence submitted by Miss Michelle Dibble (GRA0113)

 

Protection of the Gender Recognition Act 2004, prepared for the Women and Equality Committee.

 

Summary: The ‘GRA 2004’, must be kept, sacrosanct, it is too important and if watered down, allowing for self declaration. This would almost certainly pose a risk to women, in their safe single sex spaces. I also believe that the ‘GRA 2004’, should be strengthened to include: on a medical pathway and had or have appointed sexual reassignment surgery (unless there is a medical reason not to). Female to Male genital surgery, is far more complex and in most cases financially prohibitive. This should be covered by the ‘unless there is a medical reason not to’.

 

As an alternative to the GRA 2004, there could be a new ‘Multi GRA’ that recognises all the other genders. It would not include ‘for all purposes’ it would not change the birth certificate. It could be self declared, done on line and not need a diagnosis. It could also be reversible after 4 years. Most importantly, it would not give the holder the rights to enter women’s safe spaces or enter Women’s sports. Instead of a new birth certificate, the applicant could be issued with a ’Gender Recognition Identity Card’.

 

I believe that this would protect women and Transsexuals rights, but also recognise the trans activists rights. However, thought must be given to provide safe spaces for the holders of Gender Recognition Identity Card, such as unisex toilets.

 

Full Document:

I have been giving a lot of thought to the review of the GRA 2004 and how it can be protected, but also give the transgender person recognition. This is the conclusion that I have come to:

 

The GRA 2004, was fought for by Transsexuals, for Transsexuals, for a very long time, since Corbett v Corbett (1970),  through the UK courts and ended up in the European Courts.

The  European Court of Human Rights ruled on 11 July 2002, in the Goodwin v United Kingdom [2002] 2 FCR 577, that a transsexual person's inability to change the sex on their birth certificate was a breach of their rights under Article 8 and Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Following this judgement, the UK Government had to introduce new legislation to comply. The Gender Recognition Act 2004, is an Act of the UK Government, that allows people who have gender dysphoria (transsexualism) to change their legal gender. It came into effect on 4 April 2005.

 

It is estimated, that there are about 7000 Transsexuals in the UK and during the time of the GRA 2004, about 5000 certificates have been issued. A good percentage. 

 

The ‘GRA 2004’, must be kept, sacrosanct, it is too important and if watered down, allowing for self declaration. This would almost certainly pose a risk to women, in their safe single sex spaces. I also believe that the ‘GRA 2004’, should be strengthened to include: on a medical pathway and had or have appointed sexual reassignment surgery (unless there is a medical reason not to). Female to Male genital surgery, is far more complex and in most cases financially prohibitive. This should be covered by the ‘unless there is a medical reason not to’.

 

It is estimated that there are in the region of between 200,000 and 500,000 transgender persons in the UK.

 

According to Stonewall: Trans. is an umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth. This is wrong. What they are describing is the condition of gender dysphoria, transsexualism and not trans.

 

Stonewall has re-invented the meaning of trans. Transgender is the umbrella term, covering the whole of the trans. community, including: transvestites, drag queens, women impersonators, gender diverse, etc. They have tried to totally eradicate the title of transsexual which is the only one which their interpretation of trans. accurately fits. Gender Dysphoria (Transsexualism) has nothing to do with transgender.

 

Trans used to be a slang or derogatory use, for the word transsexual.

 

What is the difference? In Stonewall and other LGBT groups, transgender is the term that they use. This is an umbrella term covering the full spectrum, including transvestites, cross dressers, gender queers, drag queens, Transsexuals, etc. Unfortunately this leads people to believe that we are all the same, which of course we are not. Gender Dysphoria (Transsexualism), is a condition of birth that is caused at foetal stage in the womb. It can be looked on as a disability that cannot be seen. The others can be a choice of lifestyle and for sexual gratification; they would not want to change their sex. Transsexuals should not be confused with Transgendered.

 

From the Stonewall website.

 

The UK Government has committed to making small, administrative improvements to the process of legal recognition. The fee will be reduced to a nominal amount, and it will move online.  

 

However, this means the process won’t be de-medicalised, and a self-determination process – as is already in place in countries like the Republic of Ireland, Norway and Argentina – will not be introduced. Legal recognition will also not be extended to non-binary people and under 18s.

 

What else did the UK Government say about the consultation results? 

Alongside their response, the UK Government also published their analysis of the consultation results.

 

In total, over 100,000 individuals and organisations responded back in 2018  most of whom supported meaningful reform of the GRA to improve trans. people’s lives. 

Nearly two thirds (64.1 per cent) called for the requirement for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria to be removed. (In the main, I believe that the respondents were members or supporters, of the LGBT).

 

This survey, carried out for the review of the GRA 2004, is valueless. It does not represent a true reflection of the view of the general population. Stonewall and other LGBT groups were contacting those on their contact list, suggesting how they answer the questions on the Government questionnaire. I know, because they contacted me. I am sure that if the general public responded then these results would have been totally different.

 

Just over 100,000 responses is hardly representative of a population of over 64,000,000.

 

Why have they done this? It is known that Stonewall are supporting trans activists in, what I believe is hi-jacking the GRA 2004, as they know, as the act presently stands, most would not qualify for it. So making it self declaration; anyone who wants it, could. This must not be allowed to happen.

 

As an alternative to the GRA 2004, there could be a new ‘Multi GRA’ that recognises all the other genders. It would not include ‘for all purposes’ it would not change the birth certificate. It could be self declared, done on line and not need a diagnosis. It could also be reversible after 4 years. Most importantly, it would not give the holder the rights to enter women’s safe spaces or enter Women’s sports. Instead of a new birth certificate, the applicant could be issued with a ’Gender Recognition Identity Card’.

 

I believe that this would protect women and Transsexuals rights, but also recognise the trans activists rights.

 

However, thought must be given to provide safe spaces for the holders of Gender Recognition Identity Card, such as unisex toilets.

 

The GRA 2004, must never be watered down and open to the whole of the Transgender movement. There is nothing to stop the transgender person from applying for a GRC under the current act, as it stands, as Transsexuals do. They would then be issued with a GRC and a new birth certificate, if they qualify.

 

Author: Michelle Dibble MASC, FASC. CCCreg.

 

 

November 2020