United Kingdom

5009 readers

155 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

EHRC commissioner calls for trans people to accept reduced rights (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (6 children)

Misleading title, they’re apparently not reducing rights, they’re communicating that the rights have not changed, but assumptions were incorrectly made and it ‘feels like reduced rights’. It’s not a nice thing to learn and needs to be handled carefully and compassionately, even a policy to be permissive and encourage to normalise what the assumed increase in rights were, working towards making them actual rights. But yeah, antagonistic headlines as always.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (5 children)

That's the narrative, but trans rights have been taken away. Ask anyone who is being forced to out themselves by going to their "sex assigned at birth" bathroom, or being forced to use the accessible toilets.

That's in no small part due to the EHRC's "interim guidance" that in no way follows the law.

Not to speak of the increased trans-spotting, and the fact women can now be searched by male police officers (trans or cis) for being suspected of being trans.

And every effort is being made to pass more laws to make things worse, such as making registries of trans people, outing them to their employers and potential employers.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And every effort is being made to pass more laws to make things worse, such as making registries of trans people

I'm curious about this, could you possibly provide a source?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Well, I'm not an expert in this stuff, but here's a couple of starting points

This bill amendment that was submitted, but thankfully didn't pass
The Cass Report, a review of the science of trans studies the government bases many of its decisions on has been widely criticised by the international community. It was also found they tried to deliberately ban any subject experts from weighing in on the report during its construction.
The EHRC and other government bodies frequently consult trans hate groups while preventing any trans person from weighing in on decisions about them
Last year, the UK government banned the use of puberty blockers for adolescents, saying there is an unacceptable health risk to them, when in fact the risk is minor at best and witholding them is much more damaging to trans people (high suicide rate, for example).

Generally, rather than listening to experts, the government cherry picks bad research (similar to weirdos saying vaccines cause autism) and listens to and emboldens hate groups.

It's a words Vs actions sort of thing. They say they support trans people, while doing everything they can to make their lives worse.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

This bill amendment that was submitted, but thankfully didn't pass

"to summarise, Amendment NC21 to the Data Use and Access Bill would require sex to be defined as “sex at birth” for all identity verification requests."

From what I can tell, this isn't about creating a registry of trans people, this is about collecting "sex at birth" alongside other data for any "identity verification requests" which might occur. Also, without looking into it, I would expect any provided data would have to be deleted when it was no longer needed, in line with existing data protection legislation.

The Cass Report, a review of the science of trans studies the government bases many of its decisions on has been widely criticised by the international community. It was also found they tried to deliberately ban any subject experts from weighing in on the report during its construction.

The EHRC and other government bodies frequently consult trans hate groups while preventing any trans person from weighing in on decisions about them

Last year, the UK government banned the use of pubertymight blockers for adolescents, saying there is an unacceptable health risk to them, when in fact the risk is minor at best and witholding them is much more damaging to trans people (high suicide rate, for example).

None of this is about creating a registry of trans people.

I don't understand how you went from this stuff you've linked to, to a registry of trans people. Where did that come from?

load more comments (3 replies)