Quote Originally Posted by He's here! View Post
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
The difficulty certain posters have with answering that question is that either a) they refuse to concede that any SG bill can be open to criticism and therefore won't engage in debate about its contents (the move on, nothing to see here approach) or b) the fact that Westminster has taken a stance on the matter is deemed beyond the pale and the bill must therefore be backed unconditionally. In some cases it's both.

I think the bill is a mess and would think so no matter which political party was behind it. The supposed cross-party backing is something of a smokescreen for its defenders when the majority of MSPs were whipped to support it. I know that a number of Labour MSPs were privately conflicted, though unfortunately didn't have the courage of conviction shown by a number of SNP MSPs to simply vote with their conscience.
I've not posted in support of the Bill or in support of the Scottish govt on the matter because the idea of rights based legislation sometimes doesn't sit right with me, whether it's the Scottish govt or not. It codifys people's identities along lines which future, more authoritarian Govt might exploit to those groups' disadvantage. There was a lobbying group of people in Brazil when race based rights legislation was in process there, arguing that the debunked 19thC idea of racial difference shouldn't be expressed in any legislation. Sometimes all that legislation does is amplify ire towards the group in question.

Which is why I brought up the rhetoric surrounding this particular discussion and its conflating the trans group with sex offenders - in almost every post, yesterday and today with some posters. My questions were met with total denial but, gratefully, without having to choose a fruit.

Who is more likely to attack a woman....

...another woman?
...a man?
...a met police officer?
...a trans-person?

If the last mentioned is last on the list you have to wonder why the ear peircing, screeching discussions about the possibility of a trans person attacking women is so imbalanced when other more pressing concerns are way more palpable.

My is guess its a chance to have a go at wee nicky, hence the pile-on.

You're perfectly entitled to do so but the attempts at appearing "concerned" about women isn't really washing with me personally.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk