>> her policy on allowing anyone to self identify as a member of the opposite sex
>> purely on request. What could possible go wrong?
As pointed out below there is nothing now to stop people living in their acquired gender at will. Indeed they have to do so for two years under the current under the current legislation in order to get the Gender Recognition Certificate that formally recognises the change. I've also been aware of people I worked with making a change. One went the distance with surgery etc the other seemed content to dress androgynously and use a female name rather than Steve or whatever his birth name was.
When the Gender Recognition Act came in 2004 it seemed a liberal and far sighted piece of law. Since then the world has moved on. A number of its provisions, particularly the requirement for a diagnosis of 'Gender Dysphoria' and evidence of treatment are seen as unduly restrictive and out of step with the science/psychology.
Allowing people to self nominate AND acquire legal status without jumping through legal hoops is what's new. I don't think it's unique to LD's a policy proposition.
If we go that way then there will need to be some anti-abuse provisions to stop misuse of the provision for voyeurism in changing rooms etc. or to protect the nature of Women's refuges.
LEt's focus on getting those provisions right rather than trying to laugh the whole idea off with jokes about Arthur and Martha.
|