The Marriage (Same-sex Couples) Act

mmmpie

...was passed by Parliament a short time ago, and should receive Royal Assent tomorrow or maybe Thursday.

:woo:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

fallen_acorns

good news...

(though as a side, its bringing up some problematic issues between the trans + LGB communities: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/trans-people-angry-being-losers-gay-marriage-bill230513 - not saying that I agree with this article.. but its ruffling a few feathers)

Reply 2

mmmpie

Original post by fallen_acorns

Trans people certainly didn't get the deal they'd hoped for or deserved, but it's still a big improvement. And because of the stuff about Civil Partnership and Humanist Weddings there will probably be another marriage bill in the next few years, so so there's still a chance to make a big difference in the near future.

There's lots of flaws, but on the other hand I've spent twelve years campaigning for this. I'm going to celebrate now and pick up the pieces later.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 3

Farm_Ecology

Original post by fallen_acorns

This is actually an interesting little article. Though a little off topic, these are my thoughts:

"In addition the new bill means that, before obtaining a GRC, trans individuals in a marriage must obtain the consent of their spouse"

I'm not if that' exactly true, but I don't know the law on this. In either case, I can understand the reasoning. When you marry you are tying yourselves together legally, and thus such a large legal change would require the other halves consent.

The government also refused to remove from marriage law the option for a partner to have their marriage declared void if their spouse failed to disclose the fact that they possessed a GRC"

I see absolutely no problem with this. And frankly, if this option was removed, I would want it re-instated.

"In the United States, campaigns for equal marriage have frequently fractured, with trans groups accusing LGB activists of focusing primarily on gay issues with only vague promises to follow through on issues that affect the trans community after. The outcome of this week’s debates make it increasingly likely similar fault lines opening up in the UK."

This, I think, is a fundamental issue with the grouping LGB with Trans. They are different issues, with different problems and different tactics needed. And frankly, I almost see the Trans-argument as simply hitching a ride on the fame and support the LGB are getting.

Reply 4

username91207

Very interested to find out what's happening with the trans side of things, as the person I once knew as my dad (I'm not sure what to refer to her as now tbh :redface:

) has just been diagnosed with GID and begun the process of living as a woman. She has been married to my mum for 23 years this October, so I'd like to know what this will mean for her.

Reply 5

fallen_acorns

Original post by snowyowl

Very interested to find out what's happening with the trans side of things, as the person I once knew as my dad (I'm not sure what to refer to her as now tbh :redface:

) has just been diagnosed with GID and begun the process of living as a woman. She has been married to my mum for 23 years this October, so I'd like to know what this will mean for her.

if she has only just been diagnosed with GID - then anything to do with a GRC/gender recoginition certificate, are many years down the line..

so I wouldnt worry about it yet :smile:

- though thanks to this bill your parents wont be forced into a devorce..

-- and I think thats the part which the article misses..

Saying that trans people are 'loosing out' is very wrong.. the single biggest and only main issue with marriage+trans people is being solved... - the other issues are much more minor, and are not even agreed upon unanamously within the transgender community..

its like saying 'damn! the bill is only 90% perfect! - guess trans people are loosing out!' - well no.. its actually pretty damn amazing :biggrin:

- just not quite perfect, but still a huge huge step forward for equality :smile:

Reply 6

Darth Stewie

Original post by snowyowl

Very interested to find out what's happening with the trans side of things, as the person I once knew as my dad (I'm not sure what to refer to her as now tbh :redface:

) has just been diagnosed with GID and begun the process of living as a woman. She has been married to my mum for 23 years this October, so I'd like to know what this will mean for her.

As it stands now a transgender persons gender is considered to be the one on their birth certificate. People who have had gender reassignment surgery can get a new birth certificate which reflects their new gender which would allow them to marry someone of the opposite sex however in your case unless your dad applied for a new birth certificate then there wouldn't be a problem however if he does and legally becomes a woman then they would be forced to divorce.

When the new law comes into affect the main difference relevant to your situation will be what happens when one party has their gender reassigned within a marriage, unfortunately right now it is incredibly messy, if say your new mum officially reassigned her gender to female your parents would have to divorce and then get a civil partnership, A large problem with this other than it being completely stupid in principle is that the spouses would lose the bit of pension known as survivor’s benefits which is awarded if you out live your partner, for most people that is a considerable sum of money. Under the new law that is no longer an issue and you are not forced to get divorced if one party changes gender legally, you can also adjust your marriage accordingly with no risk to your pension.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 7

fallen_acorns

Original post by Farm_Ecology

This, I think, is a fundamental issue with the grouping LGB with Trans. They are different issues, with different problems and different tactics needed. And frankly, I almost see the Trans-argument as simply hitching a ride on the fame and support the LGB are getting.

there is a huge history.. which is very long and complicated between the two..

the communities have always been linked, for fairly obvious reasons (dispite relating seperate things, gender/sexuality - in the early days of campaigning, trans people were just seen as 'gay', as sugery/their condition wasnt recognised etc.. - and they were just seen as drag queens/cross dressers)

But dispite starting the fight for equality together... in the 80's/90's, LGB groups made the active decision that being assosiated with transgender people, would be bad for their public image... and that they could gain some favour with the conservative-straight-majority, by casting aside and dis-asosisating themselves with the trans community..

due to this organisations like stonewall, still do not include transgender individuals in their remit, - dispite naming themselves after a protest that was started by trans-women, and for the equality for all...

Most organisations now do recgognise the link between LGB and T, (both historically, societally and practically) - and that the casting asside of trans people, was a horrific thing (its set equality for trans people back decades, and forced trans people to edure discrimination+prejudice, that LGB people havent faced in years) --- and over the past century there has been a great movement to re-include the T, and make once again a unified LGBT fighting for equality :smile:

Ofcourse they have seperate issues, but there is also a lot of common ground, and history :smile:

Though (mostly in america) tension does remain between the trans and LGB groups.. due to the past actions of leaders of the equality movement :frown:

(the whole period makes quite an interesting read/study if anyone is interested :smile:

)

---

I would though disagree with the transgender community hitching onto the fame of the LGB movement... ive never met a trans person who doesnt support equality for LGB people, or a trans-activist who wasnt also fighting for equality for LGB people..
we are simply just much much fewer in number..

Reply 8

thunder_chunky

Original post by mmmpie

...was passed by Parliament a short time ago, and should receive Royal Assent tomorrow or maybe Thursday.

:woo:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Good news.

Reply 9

Clip

Let's be honest, same-sex marriage isn't really even a unanimous issue amongst gay people - nevermind transsexuals.

The legal history is really dotted, so it's no surprise that you end up with odd law. One of the main drivers behind the form of the GRA 2004 was the Corbett case, which was extremely complicated and didn't even involve someone who described themselves as transsexual.

Reply 10

Al-Mudaari

Disappointing.

I give it 30 years before your mother will be allowed to divorce your father to marry your sister bill passes through.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 11

shadowdweller

Volunteer Section Leader

Original post by Al-Mudaari

Disappointing.

I give it 30 years before your mother will be allowed to divorce your father to marry your sister bill passes through.

What's disappointing is that people still make comments like this.

Side note: That would be an incredibly specific bill

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 12

Farm_Ecology

Original post by fallen_acorns

(the whole period makes quite an interesting read/study if anyone is interested :smile:

)

I'm not really clued up on the history, so it was interesting to see the history behind it. Naturally, they both deal with sexuality and gender, and are understandably linked.

Original post by fallen_acorns

I would though disagree with the transgender community hitching onto the fame of the LGB movement... ive never met a trans person who doesnt support equality for LGB people, or a trans-activist who wasnt also fighting for equality for LGB people..
we are simply just much much fewer in number..

I didn't necessarily mean they were consciously 'piggy-backing' as it were, or even that members within (though I'm sure there are some) are responsible for it. It was more a statement that seems quite related to what you mentioned earlier in your post about LGBs wanting to disregard the Ts to win support from certain groups. I think that the majority of the support for anything LGBT related is likely mostly towards the LGB sections of the communities, and in some cases people who support LGB rights, may be much less in favour (or actively be against) Transgender rights/support.

Reply 13

Al-Mudaari

Original post by shadowdweller

What's disappointing is that people still make comments like this.

Side note: That would be an incredibly specific bill

Posted from TSR Mobile

In English, we call it incest.

Reply 14

shadowdweller

Volunteer Section Leader

Original post by Al-Mudaari

In English, we call it incest.

"your mother will be allowed to divorce your father to marry your sister bill passes through"

It was sarcasm, because of the way you'd worded it...

But either way, it has no relevance to the current Marriage Bill

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 15

Vicodin

It's about time! :smile:

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 16

Mad Vlad

Original post by Al-Mudaari

Disappointing.

I give it 30 years before your mother will be allowed to divorce your father to marry your sister bill passes through.

This is absolute nonsense.

Reply 17

Vicodin

Original post by Al-Mudaari

Disappointing.

I give it 30 years before your mother will be allowed to divorce your father to marry your sister bill passes through.

The 50's called they want their views back.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 18

Xotol

Logic and reason has prevailed. :congrats:

Reply 19

mmmpie

Original post by Al-Mudaari

In English, we call it incest.

Technically, in law, we call it a Prohibited Degree of Consanguinity, the definition of which is unchanged by this. Fear mongering loons are just that; nobody in their right mind sees a causal link between legalising same-sex marriage and legalising incest because there isn't one.