The Trans Rights Debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

The consultation process is about more than just the numbers.

The body that administers it (who, AIUI, are civil servants rather than political appointments) have to take into account the amount of cut-and-pasting that goes on. For example, an organisation might might say to its 100 members "this is what we're saying to the consultation. Please say the same". Or organisations might get together and say "let's make sure we all say the same". In those situations, it's only really one argument that is being put forward, irrespective of the numbers.

The SG unit is well aware of this, and has to make sure that the breadth of opinion is reflected when taking things to the next stage. Of course the numbers are important, but it's the different shades within those numbers that, IMO, is more important.

---

It's true that a consultation isn't a vote. It's more to highlight issues and draw on expertise.But there is a tricky issue in balancing individual responses and those from organisations representing members or working on issues. How do you weigh the views on a health issue of, say, the BMA against members of the public. Instinctively you would give weight to the BMA on the basis that they would be informed and also are a representative body. But with the current vogue for 'lived experience ' how do you weave that in? The reality is that governments will have regard to consultations, but that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

It's true that a consultation isn't a vote. It's more to highlight issues and draw on expertise.But there is a tricky issue in balancing individual responses and those from organisations representing members or working on issues. How do you weigh the views on a health issue of, say, the BMA against members of the public. Instinctively you would give weight to the BMA on the basis that they would be informed and also are a representative body. But with the current vogue for 'lived experience ' how do you weave that in? The reality is that governments will have regard to consultations, but that's it.

---

Having been involved in a few, I agree that it is a tricky process.

On those days when you're selected for further consultation, "it's a wonderful system"; I've had colleagues in the South saying how jealous they are of our accessible process, and of how much better it is than Westminster.

On those days when you're not, it's "how dare they ignore me? This is not democracy!"

With 17,000 responses, the process is even trickier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Having been involved in a few, I agree that it is a tricky process.

On those days when you're selected for further consultation, "it's a wonderful system"; I've had colleagues in the South saying how jealous they are of our accessible process, and of how much better it is than Westminster.

On those days when you're not, it's "how dare they ignore me? This is not democracy!"

With 17,000 responses, the process is even trickier.

---

If you look at the groups chosen and think it's ballance and fair your simply biased

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

If you look at the groups chosen and think it's ballance and fair your simply biased

---

From my perspective it’s hard to reconcile the disproportionate numbers of pro GRA groups and appearances before committees with the results of the open consultations.

Is this normal to have the discussion so heavily weighted in favour of one viewpoint when the broader consultations suggested a very different mood from the wider, ahem, stakeholder group?

Nicola Sturgeon is revealing an appalling naivety over trans rights | Transgender | The Guardian

Has Nicola Sturgeon finally woken up to the dangers of self-ID? (holyrood.com)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

https://twitter.com/ChtyCommission/s...K5Efkv9HA&s=19

I am sure the Scottish Government have used Mermaids and met with them about consulting on and influencing the GRA.

It feels like the GRA should be paused rather than rushing it through later this month.

---

How on earth could the GRA be in any way described as rushed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

How on earth could the GRA be in any way described as rushed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Don't think it's been rushed, but as others have pointed out the consultation process looks to have been heavily weighted in favour of groups known to be sympathetic to the proposed legislation. It's also a piece of legislation which, until more recently when the inherent dangers it poses have been more widely publicised, that many will have paid little heed to.

The UN intervention appears to have generated some further momentum among those alarmed by the bill:

https://twitter.com/mbmpolicy/status...7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

How on earth could the GRA be in any way described as rushed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

The Parliamentary process has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

The Parliamentary process has.

---

https://www.gov.scot/publications/gender-recognition-reform-scotland-bill-analysis-responses-public-consultation-exercise/

How long should it take?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.gov.scot/publications/gender-recognition-reform-scotland-bill-analysis-responses-public-consultation-exercise/

How long should it take?

---

Two Committee sessions and a rush to stage 3 feels tight. That, coupled with widespread controversy, might suggest a more considered approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Two Committee sessions and a rush to stage 3 feels tight. That, coupled with widespread controversy, might suggest a more considered approach.

---

The process began in December 2019, 3 years ago, pre pandemic. That doesn't seem rushed to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

The process began in December 2019, 3 years ago, pre pandemic. That doesn't seem rushed to me.

---

Political chatter on twitter suggests change to rules in the Parliament to allow proxy voting come in 4 January. Suggestion that Kate Forbes would vote against legislation, so FM would have to sack her. Quick stage 3 avoids this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Political chatter on twitter suggests change to rules in the Parliament to allow proxy voting come in 4 January. Suggestion that Kate Forbes would vote against legislation, so FM would have to sack her. Quick stage 3 avoids this.

---

If that's the case then the fear of losing more ministers would certainly explain the determination to squeeze this in before Christmas. That, plus the fact Sturgeon won't want the issue dogging her 'special party conference' in the new year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Political chatter on twitter suggests change to rules in the Parliament to allow proxy voting come in 4 January. Suggestion that Kate Forbes would vote against legislation, so FM would have to sack her. Quick stage 3 avoids this.

---

https://www.parliament.scot/about/news/news-listing/holyrood-committee-call-for-introduction-of-proxy-voting

I assume you mean that which is not chatter but a proposal.


Passed unanimously, apparently!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.parliament.scot/about/news/news-listing/holyrood-committee-call-for-introduction-of-proxy-voting

I assume you mean that which is not chatter but a proposal.


Passed unanimously, apparently!

---

Chatter reference speculating re Kate Forbes position. Sorry if not clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Political chatter on twitter suggests change to rules in the Parliament to allow proxy voting come in 4 January. Suggestion that Kate Forbes would vote against legislation, so FM would have to sack her. Quick stage 3 avoids this.

---

I'm surprised that we didn't have this already.

Do you know if we have pairing, as they do in Westminster?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

If that's the case then the fear of losing more ministers would certainly explain the determination to squeeze this in before Christmas. That, plus the fact Sturgeon won't want the issue dogging her 'special party conference' in the new year.

---

Get on with the day job... No that fast. 😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I'm surprised that we didn't have this already.

Do you know if we have pairing, as they do in Westminster?

---

Good question. I don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Good question. I don't think so.

---

Given that our system is less binary than WM, maybe less of a need. But it would still be helpful IMO

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63909309

UK govt may challenge the legislation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63909309

UK govt may challenge the legislation.

---

Interesting position for the UK to take. Are they going to stop recognising people from Ireland as well or is it only Scotland? Because they already accept documents from Ireland which already has the laws that Scotland is introducing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://adulthumanfemale.info/

Interesting and informative documentary which was due to be screened at Edinburgh University but the university have now banned it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

https://adulthumanfemale.info/

Interesting and informative documentary which was due to be screened at Edinburgh University but the university have now banned it.

---

There is one opinion allowed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

There is one opinion allowed.

---

By the university or the documentary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

https://adulthumanfemale.info/

Interesting and informative documentary which was due to be screened at Edinburgh University but the university have now banned it.

---

It's the UCU that are calling for it to be blocked, not the University.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

It's the UCU that are calling for it to be blocked, not the University.

---

You're right, the Evening News headline was misleading.

UCU Edinburgh on Twitter: "It is our branch policy to demand that @EdinburghUni neither host nor facilitate meetings which contain content which is transphobic, biphobic, homophobic or otherwise detrimental to the safety and wellbeing of LGBT+ staff." / Twitter

Still highly debatable whether the documentary is in any way transphobic though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

You're right, the Evening News headline was misleading.

UCU Edinburgh on Twitter: "It is our branch policy to demand that @EdinburghUni neither host nor facilitate meetings which contain content which is transphobic, biphobic, homophobic or otherwise detrimental to the safety and wellbeing of LGBT+ staff." / Twitter

Still highly debatable whether the documentary is in any way transphobic though.

---

So it's not been banned then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

https://adulthumanfemale.info/

Interesting and informative documentary which was due to be screened at Edinburgh University but the university have now banned it.

---

Great explanation of why women are women and why male appropriation of female gender identity is so dangerous.

If you’re in doubt , watch this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

https://adulthumanfemale.info/

Interesting and informative documentary which was due to be screened at Edinburgh University but the university have now banned it.

---

Thanks for posting this, it articulates well importance of the reality of biological sex to be acknowledged for women's sex based rights, I tried to find it on YouTube but its not there, any idea if it's on any other platform?