The Trans Rights Debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales

Genuinely tried to read that article but the bit in bold is hyperbole, a couple of paragraphs from that page;

Gender expression, of course, is simply how a person presents themselves in terms of dress and general appearance. So under this law, if your 13-year-old son is meeting some friends for a movie and comes down the stairs wearing only a nappy, a ball gag and an adult bib with “CUM SLUT” printed on it, and you say “You’re not bloody going out dressed like that!”, you’ll be committing a crime for which he can have you arrested as long as he claims it’s part of his gender expression.

and

If your teenage daughter is uncomfortable with her developing body – as almost all teenage girls are – and even once suggests that she might prefer to be a boy, you will be committing a punishable criminal act under the law of Scotland if you so much as ask her why she feels that way.

Just my personal opinion, but one of the main reasons this whole issue has blown up is because of sensationalist writings like these!

---

That's why I posted the other link from the Scottish Legal News site, ignore the Wings article.

“Church workers, feminist activists, mums and dads – all sorts of innocent people could find themselves on the wrong end of a prosecution if this becomes law. And I think Scottish taxpayers will eventually find themselves picking up the legal bill for another court defeat."

Also I see it's yet another piece of legislation outside the competency of the Parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 147lothian

The governing bodies allowed Lia Thomas who was ranked 462 in the male category to compete against woman and become number 1 female swimmer after identifying as a woman for only one year. This could be the end of female sport.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9SSh4D-nkQ

---

Zero to do with the GRA though.

Swimming has got this wrong though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

That's why I posted the other link from the Scottish Legal News site, ignore the Wings article.

“Church workers, feminist activists, mums and dads – all sorts of innocent people could find themselves on the wrong end of a prosecution if this becomes law. And I think Scottish taxpayers will eventually find themselves picking up the legal bill for another court defeat."

Also I see it's yet another piece of legislation outside the competency of the Parliament.

---

Anything at all from the SG on this? Anything at all? Or are you just running around shouting the sky is falling down?

Also the last sentence, ‘yet another’ suggest there is a long list of such legislation? Do you have a list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Anything at all from the SG on this? Anything at all? Or are you just running around shouting the sky is falling down?

Also the last sentence, ‘yet another’ suggest there is a long list of such legislation? Do you have a list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

You never read any article did you? If you did you would know it's based on a report from the Scottish Government. You can read it here.

https://www.gov.scot/groups/ending-c...dvisory-group/

As for other examples you had the Named Person Act, a waste of time and money as it was outside the competency of the Parliament and ultimately illegal and cost taxpayers a small fortune for nothing. You have the current GRA that potentially changes UK law so again outside the competency of the Parliament and there is now this that seems clearly outside the competency of the Parliament in terms of the changes to the law it is suggesting. Oh and there was a small matter of the Referendum Bill, also outside the competency of the Parliament. Is that enough?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

You never read any article did you? If you did you would know it's based on a report from the Scottish Government. You can read it here.

https://www.gov.scot/groups/ending-c...dvisory-group/


As for other examples you had the Named Person Act, a waste of time and money as it was outside the competency of the Parliament and ultimately illegal and cost taxpayers a small fortune for nothing. You have the current GRA that potentially changes UK law so again outside the competency of the Parliament and there is now this that seems clearly outside the competency of the Parliament in terms of the changes to the law it is suggesting. Oh and there was a small matter of the Referendum Bill, also outside the competency of the Parliament. Is that enough?

---

A few ‘seems’ and ‘potentially’s’ in there.
And no, I don’t read anything from wings. I read the other article and it points to some things that the expert committee have pointed out. Nothing from the SG yet on this though? Are they taking the proposals forward entirely as recommended?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

A few ‘seems’ and ‘potentially’s’ in there.
And no, I don’t read anything from wings. I read the other article and it points to some things that the expert committee have pointed out. Nothing from the SG yet on this though? Are they taking the proposals forward entirely as recommended?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

The Group is chaired by Nick Bland, Deputy Director of the Equality and Inclusion Division at the Scottish Government. Secretariat is provided by the Equality and Inclusion Division, Scottish Government.

So you said nothing from the SG yet it's Chaired by them and is being managed by them and you can find lots of information online, on the Scottish Government website.

Normally the SG don't ignore the findings of the "Expert Advisory Group" so I would imagine most of this will come to pass.

I know you are desperate for it to go away, but it's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

The Group is chaired by Nick Bland, Deputy Director of the Equality and Inclusion Division at the Scottish Government. Secretariat is provided by the Equality and Inclusion Division, Scottish Government.

So you said nothing from the SG yet it's Chaired by them and is being managed by them and you can find lots of information online, on the Scottish Government website.

Normally the SG don't ignore the findings of the "Expert Advisory Group" so I would imagine most of this will come to pass.

I know you are desperate for it to go away, but it's not.

---

Your right, it’s all anyone can talk about, everywhere I go.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Hyperbolise much? :greengrin

https://www.foxsports.com.au/boxing/...3e375d43e95e85

---

Not the end but dozens of female records have dropped in lots of sports. Plus full professional places and scholarships reserved for women in sports. A huge list of some of them. In most cases a poor male athlete becomes a champion female, how can they get satisfaction from beating these women

https://mobile.twitter.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1400344909182345216

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Not the end but dozens of female records have dropped in lots of sports. Plus full professional places and scholarships reserved for women in sports. A huge list of some of them. In most cases a poor male athlete becomes a champion female, how can they get satisfaction from beating these women

https://mobile.twitter.com/ripx4nutm...44909182345216

---

It’s wrong and expect that none of these records will stand long term. The sports bodies will deal with that though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

It’s wrong and expect that none of these records will stand long term. The sports bodies will deal with that though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Some would say that's a transphobic view, trans women are literally women. Obviously I disagree. But how do sports bodies find out if an athlete doesn't disclose and birth certificates have been changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Some would say that's a transphobic view, trans women are literally women. Obviously I disagree. But how do sports bodies find out if an athlete doesn't disclose and birth certificates have been changed.

---

Some might say that but they would be wrong in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Not the end but dozens of female records have dropped in lots of sports. Plus full professional places and scholarships reserved for women in sports. A huge list of some of them. In most cases a poor male athlete becomes a champion female, how can they get satisfaction from beating these women

https://mobile.twitter.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1400344909182345216

---

When it comes to sport people need to face up to biological reality, because biology is a huge part of being a woman regardless of how much people want to reduce it to a feeling or a mode.

The facts are there. In the US the records in various running events are consistent between males and females at 10,11 and even 12 years old. By 13 the differences grow massively and are consistent with the gaps between adults. It's not difficult to understand, at that age boys start to have elevated levels of testosterone and other androgens, women have a different development. There's also a huge drop out rate among girls between 12 and 16. Breast development and the related start of the menstrual cycle play a huge part in that.

I read a book recently by Lauren Fleshman called Not Bad For A Girl. She was a top NCAA runner and held all kinds of collegiate records and won countless championships. She went on to have a decent pro career but nothing like what people thought she would. She also has a degree in human biology from Stanford. She explores the inbuilt bias against woman and particularly teenage girls in athletics development and explores the physical issues that she felt hampered her own pro career (whilst not shirking personal responsibility). One of the key things she talks about is the taboo subject of periods, ultimately for 5-7 days of any given month it will be physically difficult for a woman to perform to their highest performance level. Eilish McColgan is brilliantly open about this on Twitter, she tweeted a couple of years ago about a poor performance and basically said 'I was crap today because my period started, I was bloated, in pain and just wanted to eat cake but instead I had to run against 18 other elite athletes'. She was met with comments largely saying 'too much information' predominantly from men. Personally I think that kind of brutal honesty is great and is preferable to euphemisms like 'womans issues' or 'a virus'.

It's not an easy subject (and has nothing to do with the GRA) but you can't escape the reality. Women and men are biologically different and that applies to someone who went through puberty as a teenage boy and is now transitioned or transitioning to a woman. A trans woman isn't going to have the risk of under performance because of a period, they aren't going to suffer from something like endometriosis and there is a lingering aadvantage from male puberty. I don't see how you can accomodate trans woman in women's sport though without disadvantaging those born biologically female.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

When it comes to sport people need to face up to biological reality, because biology is a huge part of being a woman regardless of how much people want to reduce it to a feeling or a mode.

The facts are there. In the US the records in various running events are consistent between males and females at 10,11 and even 12 years old. By 13 the differences grow massively and are consistent with the gaps between adults. It's not difficult to understand, at that age boys start to have elevated levels of testosterone and other androgens, women have a different development. There's also a huge drop out rate among girls between 12 and 16. Breast development and the related start of the menstrual cycle play a huge part in that.

I read a book recently by Lauren Fleshman called Not Bad For A Girl. She was a top NCAA runner and held all kinds of collegiate records and won countless championships. She went on to have a decent pro career but nothing like what people thought she would. She also has a degree in human biology from Stanford. She explores the inbuilt bias against woman and particularly teenage girls in athletics development and explores the physical issues that she felt hampered her own pro career (whilst not shirking personal responsibility). One of the key things she talks about is the taboo subject of periods, ultimately for 5-7% of any given month it will be physically difficult for a woman to perform to their highest performance level. Eilish McColgan is brilliantly open about this on Twitter, she tweeted a couple of years ago about a poor performance and basically said 'I was crap today because my period started, I was bloated, in pain and just wanted to eat cake but instead I had to run against 18 other elite athletes'. She was met with comments largely saying 'too much information' predominantly from men. Personally I think that kind of brutal honesty is great and is preferable to euphemisms like 'womans issues' or 'a virus'.

It's not an easy subject (and has nothing to do with the GRA) but you can't escape the reality. Women and men are biologically different and that applies to someone who went through puberty as a teenage boy and is now transitioned or transitioning to a woman. A trans woman isn't going to have the risk of under performance because of a period, they aren't going to suffer from something like endometriosis and there is a lingering aadvantage from male puberty. I don't see how you can accomodate trans woman in women's sport though without disadvantaging those born biologically female.

---

I think it’s clear that trans women can not be accommodated in women sport. They will have to have their own categories in future.
That should not be a problem as sport has always had categories based on all sorts of physical differences such as gender, age, weight, disabilities etc etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

When it comes to sport people need to face up to biological reality, because biology is a huge part of being a woman regardless of how much people want to reduce it to a feeling or a mode.

The facts are there. In the US the records in various running events are consistent between males and females at 10,11 and even 12 years old. By 13 the differences grow massively and are consistent with the gaps between adults. It's not difficult to understand, at that age boys start to have elevated levels of testosterone and other androgens, women have a different development. There's also a huge drop out rate among girls between 12 and 16. Breast development and the related start of the menstrual cycle play a huge part in that.

I read a book recently by Lauren Fleshman called Not Bad For A Girl. She was a top NCAA runner and held all kinds of collegiate records and won countless championships. She went on to have a decent pro career but nothing like what people thought she would. She also has a degree in human biology from Stanford. She explores the inbuilt bias against woman and particularly teenage girls in athletics development and explores the physical issues that she felt hampered her own pro career (whilst not shirking personal responsibility). One of the key things she talks about is the taboo subject of periods, ultimately for 5-7 days of any given month it will be physically difficult for a woman to perform to their highest performance level. Eilish McColgan is brilliantly open about this on Twitter, she tweeted a couple of years ago about a poor performance and basically said 'I was crap today because my period started, I was bloated, in pain and just wanted to eat cake but instead I had to run against 18 other elite athletes'. She was met with comments largely saying 'too much information' predominantly from men. Personally I think that kind of brutal honesty is great and is preferable to euphemisms like 'womans issues' or 'a virus'.

It's not an easy subject (and has nothing to do with the GRA) but you can't escape the reality. Women and men are biologically different and that applies to someone who went through puberty as a teenage boy and is now transitioned or transitioning to a woman. A trans woman isn't going to have the risk of under performance because of a period, they aren't going to suffer from something like endometriosis and there is a lingering aadvantage from male puberty. I don't see how you can accomodate trans woman in women's sport though without disadvantaging those born biologically female.

---

great post, send completely agree about Eilish McColgan, before you’d mentioned her she was exactly the person going through my mind as someone who’s a strong vocal advocate for more openness and awareness of womens periods and the affects on sports

I won't quote it because it's so long, but a good post PB. :agree:

An alternative category makes sense, but practically feels like there would be limited competitors?...

What's stopping a trans-woman competing with men, based on their original biological sex? Is that purely down to how they want to be seen as a woman now, and so don't wish to be competing in the men's section? A legitimate argument from them if so, but just curious if there's something more that I've missed.

Good post PB, the reality of biological sex has to be acknowledged for woman's sport to be a safe and fair sport, this is what happens when sport is based on how someone identifies rather than the reality of biological sex

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

When it comes to sport people need to face up to biological reality, because biology is a huge part of being a woman regardless of how much people want to reduce it to a feeling or a mode.

The facts are there. In the US the records in various running events are consistent between males and females at 10,11 and even 12 years old. By 13 the differences grow massively and are consistent with the gaps between adults. It's not difficult to understand, at that age boys start to have elevated levels of testosterone and other androgens, women have a different development. There's also a huge drop out rate among girls between 12 and 16. Breast development and the related start of the menstrual cycle play a huge part in that.

I read a book recently by Lauren Fleshman called Not Bad For A Girl. She was a top NCAA runner and held all kinds of collegiate records and won countless championships. She went on to have a decent pro career but nothing like what people thought she would. She also has a degree in human biology from Stanford. She explores the inbuilt bias against woman and particularly teenage girls in athletics development and explores the physical issues that she felt hampered her own pro career (whilst not shirking personal responsibility). One of the key things she talks about is the taboo subject of periods, ultimately for 5-7 days of any given month it will be physically difficult for a woman to perform to their highest performance level. Eilish McColgan is brilliantly open about this on Twitter, she tweeted a couple of years ago about a poor performance and basically said 'I was crap today because my period started, I was bloated, in pain and just wanted to eat cake but instead I had to run against 18 other elite athletes'. She was met with comments largely saying 'too much information' predominantly from men. Personally I think that kind of brutal honesty is great and is preferable to euphemisms like 'womans issues' or 'a virus'.

It's not an easy subject (and has nothing to do with the GRA) but you can't escape the reality. Women and men are biologically different and that applies to someone who went through puberty as a teenage boy and is now transitioned or transitioning to a woman. A trans woman isn't going to have the risk of under performance because of a period, they aren't going to suffer from something like endometriosis and there is a lingering aadvantage from male puberty. I don't see how you can accomodate trans woman in women's sport though without disadvantaging those born biologically female.

---

Good post, although I can't agree it has nothing to do with the GRA which will mean anyone who now says they are a woman literally is one. Can't see the sports authorities being able to stand up to a legal challenge based on the new act, should such a situation arise. It's nuts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

Good post, although I can't agree it has nothing to do with the GRA which will mean anyone who now says they are a woman literally is one. Can't see the sports authorities being able to stand up to a legal challenge based on the new act, should such a situation arise. It's nuts.

---

So if I rock up to play u12’s tomorrow I can just do so? Or maybe I can enter the blind ice hockey? Or do you think that maybe sports authorities will ask for my birth certificate and be able to discriminate accordingly? The GRA specifically exempts sports authorities. If it gets challenged in court then the law will be changed again to tighten it up.
You could always go test your theory and ask to play for Hibs ladies?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

Good post, although I can't agree it has nothing to do with the GRA which will mean anyone who now says they are a woman literally is one. Can't see the sports authorities being able to stand up to a legal challenge based on the new act, should such a situation arise. It's nuts.

---

The new act only changes how you get a GRC. They have been in existence since 2004.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

The Group is chaired by Nick Bland, Deputy Director of the Equality and Inclusion Division at the Scottish Government. Secretariat is provided by the Equality and Inclusion Division, Scottish Government.

So you said nothing from the SG yet it's Chaired by them and is being managed by them and you can find lots of information online, on the Scottish Government website.

Normally the SG don't ignore the findings of the "Expert Advisory Group" so I would imagine most of this will come to pass.

I know you are desperate for it to go away, but it's not.

---

Nicola Sturgeon's proposed ban on conversion therapy 'would be unlawful' (msn.com)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

The new act only changes how you get a GRC. They have been in existence since 2004.

---

That's a big 'only'. With December's Court of Session ruling doing away with the concept of biological women, the ramifications upon the legislation are clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

The Group is chaired by Nick Bland, Deputy Director of the Equality and Inclusion Division at the Scottish Government. Secretariat is provided by the Equality and Inclusion Division, Scottish Government.

So you said nothing from the SG yet it's Chaired by them and is being managed by them and you can find lots of information online, on the Scottish Government website.

Normally the SG don't ignore the findings of the "Expert Advisory Group" so I would imagine most of this will come to pass.

I know you are desperate for it to go away, but it's not.

---

Mibbe should just toss a coin like they seem to do down South! :wink::greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Anything at all from the SG on this? Anything at all? Or are you just running around shouting the sky is falling down?

Also the last sentence, ‘yet another’ suggest there is a long list of such legislation? Do you have a list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Bill
European Charter of Local Self-Government (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill

There may be others that aren’t springing to mind right now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

So if I rock up to play u12’s tomorrow I can just do so? Or maybe I can enter the blind ice hockey? Or do you think that maybe sports authorities will ask for my birth certificate and be able to discriminate accordingly? The GRA specifically exempts sports authorities. If it gets challenged in court then the law will be changed again to tighten it up.
You could always go test your theory and ask to play for Hibs ladies?

---

Not sure how U12s or blind sport comes into it but yes, were I remotely good enough (or young enough) to do so I reckon I'd have a case for a trial with Hibs ladies if I self-declared as a woman. If we're now supposed to accept that the 'transwomen are women' mantra is true in every sense of the word I can't see how Scottish sport could legally prevent it.

I think the most obvious incentive would be financial or if there are world records to be broken so therefore unlikely to be a significant issue in Scotland in the short-term, but the legislation raises significant concerns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

Good post, although I can't agree it has nothing to do with the GRA which will mean anyone who now says they are a woman literally is one. Can't see the sports authorities being able to stand up to a legal challenge based on the new act, should such a situation arise. It's nuts.

---

The GRA isn't as straightforward as that though is my understanding. You need to have lived as that gender for months, and swear an oath - breaking which is a criminal offence - that you're going to be that gender, followed by months at the other end as a cooling off period.

You don't just dust off your footy boots, say "right, I'm a woman today", and rock up for a game with the ladies team.

I think that's conflating 2 issues. The idea that someone would deliberate go through a transition process simply for a sporting advantage (is there any evidence of that happening?) which does relate to the GRA, and the issue of where transitioned/transitioning women sit within the sporting framework - what is being discussed, and what isn't related to the GRA.

Or thats my take on it anyway... :dunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

The GRA isn't as straightforward as that though is my understanding. You need to have lived as that gender for months, and swear an oath - breaking which is a criminal offence - that you're going to be that gender, followed by months at the other end as a cooling off period.

You don't just dust off your footy boots, say "right, I'm a woman today", and rock up for a game with the ladies team.

I think that's conflating 2 issues. The idea that someone would deliberate go through a transition process simply for a sporting advantage (is there any evidence of that happening?) which does relate to the GRA, and the issue of where transitioned/transitioning women sit within the sporting framework - what is being discussed, and what isn't related to the GRA.

Or thats my take on it anyway... :dunno:

---

You don't have to go through any transition process, literally anyone can now say they are a woman after 3 months of living in their acquired gender, whatever that actually means as there is no criteria or definition. It could mean sitting at home and doing nothing for 3 months, as you self ID nobody checks.

I think everyone wants to make the process for trans people easier, but by doing so it makes the process for literally anyone to become a woman/man easier. The fear is "bad faith actors" will take advantage of this and exploit it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

That's a big 'only'. With December's Court of Session ruling doing away with the concept of biological women, the ramifications upon the legislation are clear.

---

But those ramifications would be there with or without the GRA. It changed the process, it didn't change the outcome. Trans-women athletes can and do already have GRCs (since 2004) and the new legislation hasn't taken effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

But those ramifications would be there with or without the GRA. It changed the process, it didn't change the outcome. Trans-women athletes can and do already have GRCs (since 2004) and the new legislation hasn't taken effect.

---

I know but if you want to blame the SNP for an American college swimmer then you have to ignore all that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

I won't quote it because it's so long, but a good post PB. :agree:

An alternative category makes sense, but practically feels like there would be limited competitors?...

What's stopping a trans-woman competing with men, based on their original biological sex? Is that purely down to how they want to be seen as a woman now, and so don't wish to be competing in the men's section? A legitimate argument from them if so, but just curious if there's something more that I've missed.

---

Yes, I think that's right and you're not missing anything.

I think it's unfortunate for trans-women athletes but since the whole concept of segregating men's and women's sport is for no other purpose than nullifying the in-built advantages of a male-born body, I don't think there's any way round the fact that allowing trans-women to compete alongside female-born women is unfair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

You don't have to go through any transition process, literally anyone can now say they are a woman after 3 months of living in their acquired gender, whatever that actually means as there is no criteria or definition. It could mean sitting at home and doing nothing for 3 months, as you self ID nobody checks.

I think everyone wants to make the process for trans people easier, but by doing so it makes the process for literally anyone to become a woman/man easier. The fear is "bad faith actors" will take advantage of this and exploit it.

---

My naivety here - not sure where "living in their acquired gender" ends and "transitioning" starts. Presumably the later is around drugs/operations and a bit more "permanent" - I had used the terms synonymously in my post, perhaps in error, and meaning the former at each point.

I maintain that it's not easy though. Okay, there's no definition around what they have to do but it's a legally binding oath/agreement they're entering into. I find it hard to believe it would be done frivolously. I think the fear in this instance isn't one that aligns with the reality of the situation.

Regardless, there's still a disconnect between the GRA reforms and any rules/opinions on how trans people engage with sports.