The Trans Rights Debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeeRussell

Yep. I’d also add that it would be interesting to see if one or two of our posters who have put themselves at the heart of this debate, would be quite as vocal in their concerns, or even on the same side, if (for example) Nicola Sturgeon and J K Rowling were to swap stances.

---

I personally think Harry potter is pish and Nicola Sturgeon is by far the best current UK leader

There is a thread on here all about women’s safety which some of the posters on this thread who seem very worried about the threat of trans predators have barely posted on. It seems women only really need protected from trans people?
Or maybe, there is just no way to attack NS on that thread?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeeRussell

Yes I apologise for the (since edited prior to your reply) first line as after reading it I realised how it came across.

It’s all ridiculous, which was my point. And I’m not equating anything - I was asking for a 100% guarantee of a seemingly daft and hypothetical scenario, in the same way you’ve been demanding the same of a number of people before agreeing to discuss anything else.

I don’t think the proposed changes will make any difference to the likelihood of a predator attacking. I can’t guarantee it but think it’s very very low risk.

---

I accept your apology.

I and many others don't think it's a daft hypothetical. I think it is a very real possibility. Whilst it may be very very low risk, I think any risk is too much risk, hence my benchmark of 100%. There are plenty who think that as it currently stands, predators will think they can take advantage. I don't think their views should be dismissed as ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

There is a thread on here all about women’s safety which some of the posters on this thread who seem very worried about the threat of trans predators have barely posted on. It seems women only really need protected from trans people?
Or maybe, there is just no way to attack NS on that thread?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Trans predators? Why are you conflating trans people with predators? From what I can see most people are just concerned about predators who will abuse the new system.

This is the kind of thing Maggie Chapman would say, and she was correctly shouted down by SNP politicians when she said similar in Parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

There is a thread on here all about women’s safety which some of the posters on this thread who seem very worried about the threat of trans predators have barely posted on. It seems women only really need protected from trans people?
Or maybe, there is just no way to attack NS on that thread?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Is this the new tactic for moral high ground. First say its only right wingers that appose, get pointed out that left wingers appose so change tactic. Say you don't care about women's rights or its only about the snp. Pretty pathetic to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

I personally think Harry potter is pish and Nicola Sturgeon is by far the best current UK leader

---

😂 I didn’t mean you, but is interesting to learn you have such a damning opinion of Harry Potter 😁

I agree with your statement with the exception I don’t have any real strong feelings on HP either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeeRussell

[emoji23] I didn’t mean you, but is interesting to learn you have such a damning opinion of Harry Potter [emoji16]

I agree with your statement with the exception I don’t have any real strong feelings on HP either way.

---

My youngest loved Harry Potter. I’ve contributed more than my fair share to JK Rowling vast wealth and was more than happy to do so. The books are great.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

There is a thread on here all about women’s safety which some of the posters on this thread who seem very worried about the threat of trans predators have barely posted on. It seems women only really need protected from trans people?
Or maybe, there is just no way to attack NS on that thread?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I don't think women need protected from trans people. I think they shouldn't be put at increased risk from predators who wwill more easily be able to pass themselves off as trans people.

My posts are about the legislation so are applicable to this thread. For me it's not about Nicola Sturgeon though by suggesting people are using women's safety to attack her you have let slip that for you this isn't really about trans rights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Sorry I meant 1% of total pop that is on that extreme side. Yes perhaps a higher percentage of those against the bill have backwards views.

I genuinely believe though that the vast vast majority of the population agree with more rights and better treatment of trans, but want a few caveats. I don't think that is anti trans just perhaps weighing one groups rights without losing to much of another's groups rights.

---

I can agree with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 007

I don't think women need protected from trans people. I think they shouldn't be put at increased risk from predators who wwill more easily be able to pass themselves off as trans people.

My posts are about the legislation so are applicable to this thread. For me it's not about Nicola Sturgeon though by suggesting people are using women's safety to attack her you have let slip that for you this isn't really about trans rights.

---

I’ve made clear from the off that it’s not an issue I care much about at all. I’m socially liberal so fall on the side I do but had I been an advisor to the SG I would have said don’t waste any political capital at all on it because it affects such a tiny amount of people and moves even less votes. I’m sure NS had advisors telling her just that. That’s why she is a leader and they are not though. She does what she thinks is right no matter what.
Starmer and Sarwar must be listening to their advisors which is why they are in hiding. A real lack of leadership credentials on show from them. I doubt Tony Blair would have hidden the way Starmer is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I’ve made clear from the off that it’s not an issue I care much about at all. I’m socially liberal so fall on the side I do but had I been an advisor to the SG I would have said don’t waste any political capital at all on it because it affects such a tiny amount of people and moves even less votes. I’m sure NS had advisors telling her just that. That’s why she is a leader and they are not though. She does what she thinks is right no matter what.
Starmer and Sarwar must be listening to their advisors which is why they are in hiding. A real lack of leadership credentials on show from them. I doubt Tony Blair would have hidden the way Starmer is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

👍

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 007

I can agree with that.

---

Care to elaborate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I’ve made clear from the off that it’s not an issue I care much about at all. I’m socially liberal so fall on the side I do but had I been an advisor to the SG I would have said don’t waste any political capital at all on it because it affects such a tiny amount of people and moves even less votes. I’m sure NS had advisors telling her just that. That’s why she is a leader and they are not though. She does what she thinks is right no matter what.
Starmer and Sarwar must be listening to their advisors which is why they are in hiding. A real lack of leadership credentials on show from them. I doubt Tony Blair would have hidden the way Starmer is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

There people more Liberal and left than you that appose gra, it doesn't go on political lines

Starmer is probably just waiting until the court case is over.if it isn't legal then there is no discussion to be had. If it is then it passes

Ian Murray on BBC Scotland just now, saying Labour got the amendment added to the Scottish Bill that ensured the primacy of the UK equality act.

I thought the lack of something like that is why the Tories are triggering a Section 35?

Maybe they just don't like the legislation after all and a 35 is a handy way to block it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeeRussell

Would it be pedantic to suggest that someone could grab a victim by the face and force them into a cubicle without being a fully recognised trans person?

---

I don't really think what your saying is pedantic because it has more than a grain of truth to it, my guess is that the predator at the Fife supermarkets didn't attack the girls out of being trans, my guess is that identifying as a woman was used by by this individual as a cover to gain access to a woman only space.

My personal opinion on the GRB is that is bad legislation because it could also be used by predators to gain access to woman only spaces, this most likely comes from having a wife and daughters but what really irks me is that I would much rather have Nicola Sturgeon in charge than Sunak or Starmer who I see as two cheeks of the same arse, but I think that Nicola has lost her way on this issue out of trying to appease the Greens, Maggie Chapmen's comments about it being ok to give beta blockers to 8 year old's fills me with dread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Care to elaborate

---

It sounds plausible to me. I don't have anything else to add.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

Ian Murray on BBC Scotland just now, saying Labour got the amendment added to the Scottish Bill that ensured the primacy of the UK equality act.

I thought the lack of something like that is why the Tories are triggering a Section 35?

Maybe they just don't like the legislation after all and a 35 is a handy way to block it.

---

Just because it's stated in the legislation doesn’t mean it will have that effect. The courts will sort that one way or another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I think their fears are groundless. They may be real but they do appear to be groundless. I don’t see any prospect of a large rise in trans predators. It hasn’t happened in any other country that introduced self ID so I can’t see why it would happen here?
All I see are evermore obscure hypotheticals getting thrown around. I’m not surprised that some women are now afraid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

You are missing the point. It's not a concern about 'trans predators' but predators using the legislation. But why does it have to be predators. Why can’t people have single sex care if they want it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

There people more Liberal and left than you that appose gra, it doesn't go on political lines

Starmer is probably just waiting until the court case is over.if it isn't legal then there is no discussion to be had. If it is then it passes

---

Is it normal for him, or other party leaders, to wait for court cases before making comment on such a highly politicised subject, which is very prevalent in the media right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

You are missing the point. It's not a concern about 'trans predators' but predators using the legislation. But why does it have to be predators. Why can’t people have single sex care if they want it?

---

Does the act change people right to single sex care?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Is this the new tactic for moral high ground. First say its only right wingers that appose, get pointed out that left wingers appose so change tactic. Say you don't care about women's rights or its only about the snp. Pretty pathetic to be honest.

---

It's what the left have been doing for years now, and pretty successfully too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Does the act change people right to single sex care?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

If someone self declares as a sex then what basis in law is there to object to them providing care?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 007

It sounds plausible to me. I don't have anything else to add.

---

Haha I'm so sorry it was early and I thought you said I can't agree. Thought you were just basically saying nah and that's it. If your agree then nowt to add really ha. Sorry I'm a tit or need glasses or both

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeeRussell

Is it normal for him, or other party leaders, to wait for court cases before making comment on such a highly politicised subject, which is very prevalent in the media right now?

---

Yes if he feels it doesn't involve in. In as much if the court rules it isn't legal then it shouldn't stand, if they rule it is then its Scottish Parliaments choice.

Although I don't agree with it. If it's legal then it must stand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeeRussell

Is it normal for him, or other party leaders, to wait for court cases before making comment on such a highly politicised subject, which is very prevalent in the media right now?

---

If I was Starmer I'd say nothing. Let the Tories and the SNP/Greens slug it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

If I was Starmer I'd say nothing. Let the Tories and the SNP/Greens slug it out.

---

You don’t think there is a political cost to hiding from issues?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

I know I am a bit pissed, but you know nothing!!! the majority of the Met are hard working decent people, you know nothing about rape victims and the trauma suffered by them both male and female. I have dealt with the cruelty committed to others that you could not imagine. I was SOIT trained so do me a favour STFU or piss off

---

Charming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

If I was Starmer I'd say nothing. Let the Tories and the SNP/Greens slug it out.

---

And that is his strategy so far, just be like the Tories and hope no one notices. He won't win the next election by hiding. I actually don't think he will win it anyway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

You don’t think there is a political cost to hiding from issues?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

He will make that calculation. As it's such a contentious issue I can see a logic to keeping out of it. In some respects I think it's easier just now as the 'issue' has moved on to whether the Scottish Parliament has exceeded it's powers. The Tories and the SNP/Greens will slug that out, but ultimately it will be a legal interpretation that determines it. There is a lot in it for the Tories and the SNP/Greens that goes far beyond the actual issue, which is why you are getting the megaphone rhetoric.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weecounty hibby

And that is his strategy so far, just be like the Tories and hope no one notices. He won't win the next election by hiding. I actually don't think he will win it anyway

---

I'd put your money up at the bookies then. 1/3 labour win 9/4 the tories, punt on