The Trans Rights Debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

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.

---

One of the problems with the legislation is how can it be a criminal offence to do it in bad faith when there is no definition of what living in your acquired gender actually means. It's like saying if you break the speed limit you are committing a criminal offence but nobody can tell you what the speed limit is.

There is no requirement to transition, some may decide not to and some may decide they do want to.

You would hope the vast majority use the new rules as they are meant to be used, but history tells us predatory men will use whatever means they can to fulfil their needs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

One of the problems with the legislation is how can it be a criminal offence to do it in bad faith when there is no definition of what living in your acquired gender actually means. It's like saying if you break the speed limit you are committing a criminal offence but nobody can tell you what the speed limit is.

There is no requirement to transition, some may decide not to and some may decide they do want to.

You would hope the vast majority use the new rules as they are meant to be used, but history tells us predatory men will use whatever means they can to fulfil their needs.

---

A speed limit is a binary thing. You're either over it or under it (even if you're not told what it is). I guess it comes back to the complexity of the issue that living as a man/woman will mean different things to different people. I think the policy has been written in good faith so as to make it available to anyone as they see it applying to them. Something which I think is the right thing to do, despite myself finding things to be generally better when rules are black and white it's an acknowledgement of the grey we do all live in.

Again though, that's the GRA itself and not the implications on sport.

I think your final paragraph isn't about the implications on sports either but presumably around implications of requiring the use of communal spaces as a trans person, and is a separate topic which needs viewed through a whole other lens from the sports one IMO. An even more complicated topic at that.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...box=1673003221

It appears trans people account for 0.5% of the population.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

A speed limit is a binary thing. You're either over it or under it (even if you're not told what it is). I guess it comes back to the complexity of the issue that living as a man/woman will mean different things to different people. I think the policy has been written in good faith so as to make it available to anyone as they see it applying to them. Something which I think is the right thing to do, despite myself finding things to be generally better when rules are black and white it's an acknowledgement of the grey we do all live in.

Again though, that's the GRA itself and not the implications on sport.

I think your final paragraph isn't about the implications on sports either but presumably around implications of requiring the use of communal spaces as a trans person, and is a separate topic which needs viewed through a whole other lens from the sports one IMO. An even more complicated topic at that.

---

Some would argue sex is too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Some would argue sex is too!

---

Presumably why it's about gender rather than sex. :dunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

Presumably why it's about gender rather than sex. :dunno:

---

And that's where we get into the mess. What is gender?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

And that's where we get into the mess. What is gender?

---

Apparently it's:

"the male sex or the female sex, especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones, or one of a range of other identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

Presumably why it's about gender rather than sex. :dunno:

---

They're one and the same in Scotland now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

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.

---

One of the most glaring absurdities of the legislation. As others have pointed out there are no checks whatsoever, medical or otherwise. Once this legislation is enacted you can claim you've lived in your acquired gender for a couple of months and the GRC is yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...box=1673003221

It appears trans people account for 0.5% of the population.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I think I said that about a week ago. 😉

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

And that's where we get into the mess. What is gender?

---

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

---

Thanks for taking the time to post this. The issue is that the concepts have become really blurred. And the interaction between the GRA and the Haldane judgement reinforces that. So far from being separate they have become conflated. I guess most people don't have problem if a man chooses to live as a woman. But it where he says he is a woman that all of the issues arise.

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.

---

Bad faith actors like Katie Dolatowski would certainly see a Gender Recognition Certificate as a loop in the law that can be exploited to gain access to woman only spaces. This is the male pedophile who identifies as a woman who was convicted of filming a 12 year old girl with the mobile phone over the partition wall in the female toilet cubicle of a Halbeath Asda Store. Same person also grabbed a 10 year old girl by the face in a Morrisons in Kircaldy forced her into the female toilet cubicle and sexually assaulted her. This person had stayed at a domestic violence refuge for mothers and children in Leeds for 71 days and also a woman only hostel in Fife.

Katie Dolatowski was jailed at Polmot young offenders institute for male offenders, but after assaulting a fellow inmate has since been transferred to the woman only Cornton Vale Prison.

https://news.stv.tv/west-central/sco...ice-criticised

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 147lothian

Bad faith actors like Katie Dolatowski would certainly see a Gender Recognition Certificate as a loop in the law that can be exploited to gain access to woman only spaces. This is the male pedophile who identifies as a woman who was convicted of filming a 12 year old girl with the mobile phone over the partition wall in the female toilet cubicle of a Halbeath Asda Store. Same person also grabbed a 10 year old girl by the face in a Morrisons in Kircaldy forced her into the female toilet cubicle and sexually assaulted her. This person had stayed at a domestic violence refuge for mothers and children in Leeds for 71 days and also a woman only hostel in Fife.

Katie Dolatowski was jailed at Polmot young offenders institute for male offenders, but after assaulting a fellow inmate has since been transferred to the woman only Cornton Vale Prison.

https://news.stv.tv/west-central/sco...ice-criticised

---

Nothing really to do with the GRA though is it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Nothing really to do with the GRA though is it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Only that it a) makes the process much shorter and easier and b) introduces criminal penalties for revealing that someone has a GRA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...box=1673003221

It appears trans people account for 0.5% of the population.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

And yet organisations like Stonewall insist the numbers are far larger and growing so rapidly that ever increasing resources need to be devoted to their needs. If the numbers reported in that Guardian piece are accurate (we don't of course yet know Scotland's numbers due to the SG's screw-up over the census) then the trans population is so tiny as to be almost invisible. Just underlines the absurdity of a very small number of people wielding such influence over the SG that they've used a sledgehammer to crack a nut approach over legislation which has served only to create more problems than it solves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Nothing really to do with the GRA though is it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

The GRA has a lot to do with male sex offenders being transferred to woman's prisons because if being a woman is an identity category rather than the reality of biological sex then inevitably some male prisoners will self-ID.

As is said here before the GRA was introduced in Ireland in 2015 there was no one in the women only prison for a sex crime and now there are three and they are all men who identify as women.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmFr71msWYI

Lengthy discussion on Politics Live this afternoon on the GRA in Scotland. Bit of debate around if the UK Government will for the first time use a S35 order to stop the Bill getting Royal Assent. I think they have about 1 week left to do it if that's what they plan to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Lengthy discussion on Politics Live this afternoon on the GRA in Scotland. Bit of debate around if the UK Government will for the first time use a S35 order to stop the Bill getting Royal Assent. I think they have about 1 week left to do it if that's what they plan to do.

---

Scots gender certificate ‘invalid’ south of border | Scotland | The Times

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

Scots gender certificate ‘invalid’ south of border | Scotland | The Times

---

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/10/tories-review-lgbtq-gender-recognition-certificate-deal?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABII ACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=167338769795 13&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare= https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fworld%2F2023%2 Fjan%2F10%2Ftories-review-lgbtq-gender-recognition-certificate-deal

Trans people from countries like Canada, Australia and New Zealand have had their gender recognition certificates respected by the UK for years. Seeking to end this system is an extraordinary move, not based on evidence or experience, that will effectively serve as a ‘trans travel ban’.”

Here is a clip from Politics Live.

https://twitter.com/soniasodha/statu...EnDqNQgqA&s=19

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/10/tories-review-lgbtq-gender-recognition-certificate-deal?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABII ACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=167338769795 13&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare= https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fworld%2F2023%2 Fjan%2F10%2Ftories-review-lgbtq-gender-recognition-certificate-deal

Trans people from countries like Canada, Australia and New Zealand have had their gender recognition certificates respected by the UK for years. Seeking to end this system is an extraordinary move, not based on evidence or experience, that will effectively serve as a ‘trans travel ban’.”

---

Unlike those countries, the Scottish reforms remove all checks and balances from the process of acquiring a GRC.

I suspect a refusal outwith Scotland to recognise certificates issued here won't work. Debbie Hayton, who has a far deeper understanding of what's at stake than me, explains here why the UK government is likely to have to challenge the bill itself (and interestingly points out that a Westminster v Holyrood battle over this issue may not actually suit Sturgeon, bearing in mind how unpopular the bill is among the Scottish electorate at large):

The UK can’t ignore Scotland’s gender recognition Bill (spectator.co.uk)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Here is a clip from Politics Live.

https://twitter.com/soniasodha/statu...EnDqNQgqA&s=19

---

Sonia Sodha has been consistently spot-on when it comes to the dangers inherent in this legislation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

Unlike those countries, the Scottish reforms remove all checks and balances from the process of acquiring a GRC.

I suspect a refusal outwith Scotland to recognise certificates issued here won't work. Debbie Hayton, who has a far deeper understanding of what's at stake than me, explains here why the UK government is likely to have to challenge the bill itself (and interestingly points out that a Westminster v Holyrood battle over this issue may not actually suit Sturgeon, bearing in mind how unpopular the bill is among the Scottish electorate at large):

The UK can’t ignore Scotland’s gender recognition Bill (spectator.co.uk)

---

"Yes there will be howls of outrage from the SNP, and no doubt Sturgeon would drag the matter through the courts. But what really matters is the court of public opinion, especially in Scotland. The SNP has been spoiling for a fight over sovereignty. Where better for the UK government to challenge them than over an issue that is unpopular among the people of Scotland? Polling suggests that two thirds of Scots oppose self-ID"

I really hope Nicola Sturgeon isn't using Trans people as pawns in her constitutional battles. I keep hearing this was years in the making and not rushed, if that's the case why wasn't something as simple as checking it against UK law done in a more detailed way.

A complex issue which is rather nuanced, but the way I read the poll being quoted (unless there's another one) is that the two thirds who oppose were asked specifically about whether they agreed with reducing the age from 18 to 16.

Obviously, if that's a part of the legislation then they effectively oppose the legislation in its entirety but it feels a bit disingenuous to use that figure against the whole concept. :dunno:

EDIT: I assume this is out of date now, but BBC seemed to have data which covered the broad topic and specifics. It had a similar result (53% opposition to 16-year olds v 31% support) but also showed that a majority did favour the overall right to self-ID (40% v 38%).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-60214574

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-64228256

Looks like it's England that is out of step with the rest of the UK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

"Yes there will be howls of outrage from the SNP, and no doubt Sturgeon would drag the matter through the courts. But what really matters is the court of public opinion, especially in Scotland. The SNP has been spoiling for a fight over sovereignty. Where better for the UK government to challenge them than over an issue that is unpopular among the people of Scotland? Polling suggests that two thirds of Scots oppose self-ID"

I really hope Nicola Sturgeon isn't using Trans people as pawns in her constitutional battles. I keep hearing this was years in the making and not rushed, if that's the case why wasn't something as simple as checking it against UK law done in a more detailed way.

---

That would terrible, taking a side in these matters due to a dislike of one of the protagonists.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

"Yes there will be howls of outrage from the SNP, and no doubt Sturgeon would drag the matter through the courts. But what really matters is the court of public opinion, especially in Scotland. The SNP has been spoiling for a fight over sovereignty. Where better for the UK government to challenge them than over an issue that is unpopular among the people of Scotland? Polling suggests that two thirds of Scots oppose self-ID"

I really hope Nicola Sturgeon isn't using Trans people as pawns in her constitutional battles. I keep hearing this was years in the making and not rushed, if that's the case why wasn't something as simple as checking it against UK law done in a more detailed way.

---

You certainly seem to consider this a constitutional issue. Sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

You certainly seem to consider this a constitutional issue. Sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I am not the one in Government making laws that are poorly designed and researched. As pointed out previously this isn't the first time. Where are the check and balances?

Remember the UN Children's Rights Bill, the SNP were advised it was outwith the competency of the Parliament but went ahead anyway and then made a big thing about how the evil UK Government was blocking the rights of children etc, yet a few small amendments would make the Bill perfectly fine. Have the SNP made those changes and brought it back to Parliament seeing as it was so important? No, of course they haven't.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/p...ights-28830728

"SNP accused of turning children's rights bill into 'constitutional bunfight'

Scotland's Children's Commissioner warned "Government inaction speaks louder than words" after the legislation was blocked by the Supreme Court"

So they have form for doing this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

You certainly seem to consider this a constitutional issue. Sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Yet it's the SNP who are obsessed with that isn't it?