B1044 – Gender Recognition Bill 2016

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
B1044 – Gender Recognition Bill 2016, TSR Labour
Image
Gender Recognition Bill 2016
An Act to recognise non-binary genders

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

1: Definitions
(1) Male is anyone who self-identifies as male
(2) Female is anyone who self-identifies as female
(3) Agender is anyone who doesn’t self-identify with a gender
(4) Genderfluid is anyone whose gender identity changes frequently
(5) Non-binary and genderqueer is anyone who doesn’t self-identify as male or female

2: Legally recognised gender identities and honorifics in the UK
(1) Male, female, agender, genderfluid, non-binary and genderqueer will all be legally recognised gender identities in the United Kingdom
(2) Mx, Ind and Misc will be a legally recognised honorific in the UK
(2) All legally recognised gender identities and honorifics are valid for use on all forms of official ID, including but not limited to driver's licenses and passports


3: Method to legally change gender
(1) Existing methods of changing a person’s legal gender identity are to be replaced with self deceleration


4: Equality Act 2010 Amendment
(1) In Equality Act 2010 (c. 15), replace section 7 with the following:
"7: Gender

(1) A person has the protected characteristic of gender if the person's gender is not the same as their sex at birth.
(2) A reference to a transsexual person is a reference to a person who has the protected characteristic of gender.
(3) In relation to the protected characteristic of gender--
(1) (a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a transsexual person;
(1) (b) a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to transsexual persons."


5: Extent, Commencement and Short Title
(1) This Act extends to the United Kingdom.
(2) The provisions of this Act come into force on the 1st October 2016
(3) This Act may be cited as the Gender Recognition Bill 2016.


notesThis bill does three main things.
  • The act introduces non-binary genders into UK law, and allows non-binary genders to be used on official documents such as passports.
  • It changes how one legally changes their gender to a method such one in Ireland, self-delectation, which is less intrusive and removes the outdated view that a panel would somehow better know your gender identity than yourself.
  • Finally the act amends the Equality Act 2010 to recognise gender as a protected characteristic when a person's gender is not the same as their sex.
The Irish self-decelration from can be seen here, it does not include non-binary genders but a UK form which did would look similar

The act being amended is the Equality Act 2010
1
PetrosAC
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
I assume this is what Kay_Winters' question was about?

A Preliminary Aye. My only question is, what is the difference between agender and non-binary?
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
How about no, just like last time, get a psychiatrist involved instead.
5
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
I identify as an attack helicopter will I be protected?
14
cBay
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
Gender is a social construct, I don't see why it needs to be legally recognised whatsoever tbh.. just stick to sex for legal purposes?
5
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
Not a chance.

You can call yourself a fairy for all i care but there's absolutely no reason why the state should pander to you.

(Original post by PetrosAC)
I assume this is what Kay_Winters' question was about?

A Preliminary Aye. My only question is, what is the difference between agender and non-binary?
As a Liberal why do believe its nessesary for the state to have multiple gender options beyond the norm (90%+ of the population). Since the state does not actively criminalise calling yourself a polygender or whatever, why is this bill needed. As a fan of small government, why do you seek to support change for change's sake since this is what the bill amounts to.
4
GaelicBolshevik
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
Why. Just why? We had this before. We're not obligated to list our sexual preferences so why should we allow the blurring of lines between genders? All it does is confuse and annoy people, and can lead to intolerance.
2
Asolare
Badges: 20
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
No, No, No.

Gender is an individual thing and, as already mentioned, a construct. The legal system should only be dealing with "sex" and to hell if we're going to start classifying sex as someone "who calls themselves X sex despite having Y sexual organ".

This will be a very slippery slope if passed.
3
TheDefiniteArticle
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
Aye. I see I haven't managed to get in before the 'mental disease' people. Aph, a significant part of this Bill is about discrimination.
0
SakuraCayla
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by PetrosAC)
I assume this is what Kay_Winters' question was about?

A Preliminary Aye. My only question is, what is the difference between agender and non-binary?
More of a coincidence really, I had that question ready for a while for whenever there was a DPMQ.

As for your question, agender is someone who doesn't identify as any gender, non-binary is someone who doesn't identify as male or female, but does identify with a gender.

(Original post by cBay)
Gender is a social construct, I don't see why it needs to be legally recognised whatsoever tbh.. just stick to sex for legal purposes?
We already legally recognise people who are transgender if they are male or female, this just takes it a step further, to use sex would be a step backwards.

Edit: lots of posts since I typed this, I'll get to all of you later tonight
0
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by Kay_Winters)
More of a coincidence really, I had that question ready for a while for whenever there was a DPMQ.

As for your question, agender is someone who doesn't identify as any gender, non-binary is someone who doesn't identify as male or female, but does identify with a gender.



We already legally recognise people who are transgender if they are male or female, this just takes it a step further, to use sex would be a step backwards.
Transgender isn't some 3rd made up gender.
0
Elizabeth II
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
Aye.
0
cBay
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by Kay_Winters)
We already legally recognise people who are transgender if they are male or female, this just takes it a step further, to use sex would be a step backwards.

Edit: lots of posts since I typed this, I'll get to all of you later tonight
Correct me if I'm wrong, but can one not already choose to change their legally recognised sex? If not, then I would support a bill to introduce that. However I simply do not understand what gender identity has to do with the state and would much prefer to simply remove all reference to it within law.
0
PetrosAC
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Rakas21)
Not a chance.

You can call yourself a fairy for all i care but there's absolutely no reason why the state should pander to you.



As a Liberal why do believe its nessesary for the state to have multiple gender options beyond the norm (90%+ of the population). Since the state does not actively criminalise calling yourself a polygender or whatever, why is this bill needed. As a fan of small government, why do you seek to support change for change's sake since this is what the bill amounts to.
This has nothing to do with small government or large government. I believe in opportunity and freedom, and this gives some people, no matter how small the minority, the opportunity to legally self-identify as they see fit.

(Original post by Kay_Winters)
More of a coincidence really, I had that question ready for a while for whenever there was a DPMQ.

As for your question, agender is someone who doesn't identify as any gender, non-binary is someone who doesn't identify as male or female, but does identify with a gender.



We already legally recognise people who are transgender if they are male or female, this just takes it a step further, to use sex would be a step backwards.

Edit: lots of posts since I typed this, I'll get to all of you later tonight
I'm still not quite sure I understand non-binary. If you do not identify as male or female (at least some of the time or changing between them), then surely you are agender?
1
Mactotaur
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
I'd argue against 'genderqueer' if only for the sake of it being a slur, and not all members of the population being comfortable with such reclamation.
0
SakuraCayla
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by joecphillips)
Transgender isn't some 3rd made up gender.
Transgender is an umbrella term really, encompassing binary genders, non binary genders and agender

(Original post by cBay)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but can one not already choose to change their legally recognised sex? If not, then I would support a bill to introduce that. However I simply do not understand what gender identity has to do with the state and would much prefer to simply remove all reference to it within law.
You can legally change your gender from male to female and from female to male, but that is gender not sex, as sex and gender different things.

As for the state, this is abput the state simply moving to recognise that gender isn't binary, and to move to a better system of legally changing one's gender. The state is making it legally recognised, updating the process to a more efficient, progressive system and extending anti-discrimination law, extending essentially what is already happening

I'll get to everyone else in a moment, my phone is taking issue with the text box on TSR
0
SakuraCayla
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
(Original post by PetrosAC)
This has nothing to do with small government or large government. I believe in opportunity and freedom, and this gives some people, no matter how small the minority, the opportunity to legally self-identify as they see fit.



I'm still not quite sure I understand non-binary. If you do not identify as male or female (at least some of the time or changing between them), then surely you are agender?
Some people identify between male and female, but not as male or female, that is non-binary. Imagine it as a line, male is on the left, female is on the right, non-binary is between the two. Agender would be off the line, identifying as no gender.

(Original post by Mactotaur)
I'd argue against 'genderqueer' if only for the sake of it being a slur, and not all members of the population being comfortable with such reclamation.
Valid point, it's certainly something that will be considered for a second reading
0
Life_peer
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
Oh, my… :laugh:

Image
0
SakuraCayla
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by DMcGovern)
Why. Just why? We had this before. We're not obligated to list our sexual preferences so why should we allow the blurring of lines between genders? All it does is confuse and annoy people, and can lead to intolerance.
We do list gender however, and honorifics. Also as I said to someone in the subforum, there is already intolerance, which leads to hate crimes, discrimination and violence. The people who would legally identify with the new legally recognised genders would already openly identify as non-binary or agender, it just wouldn't be legally recognised, the intolerance would still be there.
0
toronto353
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
I'll be voting no on this. While I accept that people identify as different genders, I'm very much of the opinion that a person's sex is what should be recognised. On this issue, I'm very much a social conservative and I cannot support this Bill.
2
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (596)
33.9%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (732)
41.64%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (351)
19.97%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (79)
4.49%

Watched Threads

View All