Oxford Feminist Union - Amplifying Women: DEEDS WITH WORDS 3/4 - Maya Forstater
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- Maya Forstater is a business and international development researcher who lost her job at the Centre for Global Development in a landmark case legal case which established that gender critical views are 'worthy of respect in a democratic society' and are protected as a belief under the Equality Act 2010. She is a co-founder of Sex Matters, the campaign group for clarity about sex in law and life.
'Deeds with Words is the first event of Oxford Feminist Union's 'Amplifying Women' series: a platform for women's voices to be heard on today's most important issues. It was named to reference the Women’s Social and Political Union motto from 1903: Deeds Not Words, which was a call to radical action, a call to civil disobedience. Deeds with Words acknowledges the immense power that language has, and the courage that many of us need these days in order to speak up publicly on women’s issues - something that some would class as disobedience in itself.
What a refreshing talk. Thank you Maya Forstater.
The initial Gender Recognition Act was a well intentioned but extremely ill conceived piece of legislation that has contributed a huge amount to the problems we are seeing today. Transexual people are a minority group deserving of protection from discrimination in law but allowing birth markers to be changed has opened the door to TWAW and all that implies. A better solution would be to remove sex on driving licenses etc.
That isnt a good solution. Informatiom on biological sex is important data on documentation like drivers licences. A good example is if someone is pulled over for breaking a driving law, their criminal data would have to reflect biological sex.
A better solution is;
1. Repeal the GRA 2004
2. Strengthen the Equality Act 2010 by removing the gender reassignment PC and ensuring males and females are not discriminated against where sex does not matter (irrespective of expression) and lawfully discriminated where sex does matter
3. Encourage more acceptance of males and females who don't conform to sex stereotypes in wider society without dismissing ir erasing sex.
@@jayjee735 so your answer to trans people not taking rights and protections away from anyone (despite claims) is too…. Take rights and protections away from trans people?
@Rossy 90 what rights and protections?
1. The GRA was written before same sex marriage laws and was designed to allow same sex couples to marry under the legal fiction that one had legally changed sex- this is obsolete now.
2. The number of people applying for a GRA had not changed that much since the law was passes, people don't really apply for one and the numbers have nit increased dramatically since the cost dropped
3. What is the point of changing BC when pension age is equal, car insurance is equal, marriage is equal and passports and driving licences can have sex marker changed on a self ID basis?
5. There is already anti discrimination laws for gender reassignment PC in Equality Act 2010 but if sex PC us strengthened, trans people can still be protected from unlawful discrimination.
The GRA 2004 is obsolete, what rights and protections do trans people need, that they don't already have?
@@jayjee735 so GRC was not just about marriage it was about legal recognition in law. Marriage was part of that. But a marriage involving a trans person does not just have to be same sex.
Trans people often don’t both with the GRC process because it needlessly difficult. It was the right step but requires updating, hence the advocacy around it.
Discrimination based on gender reassignment is not the same as discrimination as based on sex. That’s why they are two separate categories. Improving protection on one does not mean you should or can take protection away from another.
All I see is childish petulance.