The Trans Rights Debate

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

An interesting read.

It's a far more eloquent extension of my views on the subject. The debate has become so polarised and so dominated by sloganeering that the sensible compromises put forward in the editorial have become unpalatable to the extremes on both sides.

A pause for thought, further debate and additional independent advice would be the sensible move in Scotland right now. It's become such a toxic issue though, even if only among a minority, that there seems an insatiable desire just to get it done.

My thoughts exactly. The Observer editorial is excellent and everyone on both sides of this furore should take the time to read it.

[WhileTheChief..]

If a man self-identifies as a woman, and is subsequently convicted of a crime which would usually carry a custodial sentence for a man, what happens?

Do the courts treat him as a male and lock him up or as female and she gets a lesser sentence?

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If a man self-identifies as a woman, and is subsequently convicted of a crime which would usually carry a custodial sentence for a man, what happens?

Do the courts treat him as a male and lock him up or as female and she gets a lesser sentence?

No idea. Do we have gender specific sentencing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[degenerated]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Doesn’t the legislation have cross party support? Why would it then need a pause for a cross party summit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would be interesting to know if sex offenders been lured to anywhere else that has this legislation already in place.

[archie]

https://wingsoverscotland.com/why-do...rs-hate-women/

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://wingsoverscotland.com/why-do...rs-hate-women/

Perfect example of how things get polarised. No voters favourite blogger claiming SNP voters hate women.
Still if you think that helps your case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If a man self-identifies as a woman, and is subsequently convicted of a crime which would usually carry a custodial sentence for a man, what happens?

Do the courts treat him as a male and lock him up or as female and she gets a lesser sentence?

Police Scotland have stated that their policy if a woman is raped by a man who self declares as a woman then the rape will be recorded as having been committed by a woman. Needless to say the flak this has attracted has seen the policy reviewed.
Another absurdity is that if a woman who identifies as a man is raped and gets pregnant then her rights under the Abortion Act will be compromised.

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Perfect example of how things get polarised. No voters favourite blogger claiming SNP voters hate women.
Still if you think that helps your case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I actually posted it without comment.

[WhileTheChief..]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No idea. Do we have gender specific sentencing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think in general terms yes. The courts will usually not want to imprison females where possible.

[He's here!]

I gather (from my local Labour MSP) that they'll be tabling some stronger amendments to the Bill, having become frustrated at being portrayed as the SG's willing stooges in getting this legislation through. I get the impression that privately the party is all over the place on this issue and that Johann Lamont is correct in asserting that a majority aren't in favour. Think tomorrow's debate ahead of the vote is expected to drag on for many hours.

[Stairway 2 7]

Scot gov trying to whip so no ammendments, as that would risk a delay?

https://mobile.twitter.com/holyroodm...61008086405146

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Scot gov trying to whip so no ammendments, as that would risk a delay?

https://mobile.twitter.com/holyroodm...61008086405146

Sturgeon will rue the day she allowed Harvie and Slater a sniff of power I reckon.

Even if they force it through, the UK govt has the power to intervene (and, I suspect, may well do so):

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/623243

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Scot gov trying to whip so no ammendments, as that would risk a delay?

https://mobile.twitter.com/holyroodm...61008086405146

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64032916

I see the MSPs Robison has written to asking then to drop their amendments are from all parties, including Michelle Thomson.

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It was deliberate. The order and range of reasons for people responding the way they do. Unfortunately, some people don't want to listen to another viewpoint- these people DO exist. They are not the majority. But those who prevented women meeting to discuss their thoughts on issues connected to this debate were stifling debate.

If people don't read beyond that first discussion point then I'm not offended but I'm also not surprised.

I've read plenty of good points on here from posters who I disagree with. Its an extremely complex issue with no easy answers and I'm genuinely a bit unsure what my own position is in all this.

But as soon as I read or see someone use words like virtue signalling, woke etc then I will save myself time and not proceed any further as from my experience, 99% of what follows is best ignored.

[James310]

Thought I would tune in to Parliament TV to see the final debate on this, Parliament has been suspended though and it all looked like a bit of a farce. Points of order all over the place. Apparently over 150 amendments to be debated.

[WeeRussell]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thought I would tune in to Parliament TV to see the final debate on this, Parliament has been suspended though and it all looked like a bit of a farce. Points of order all over the place. Apparently over 150 amendments to be debated.

Do you reckon anyone in particular is to blame for the farce?

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you reckon anyone in particular is to blame for the farce?

Looks like they all don't know what they are doing.

As for 150 amendments, that suggests poor legislation.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Looks like they all don't know what they are doing.

As for 150 amendments, that suggests poor legislation.

Or opposition trying to derail it?
I think it’s good that everyone is getting their say today in parliament. That’s why we elect them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Or opposition trying to derail it?
I think it’s good that everyone is getting their say today in parliament. That’s why we elect them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There was an amendment just rejected about everyone getting a say.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://wingsoverscotland.com/why-do...rs-hate-women/

Maths clearly not his strongpoint or he might have realised that the 44% (ex Don't Knows) of SNP voters who disagreed the reforms "pose a safety risk to women" contain enough people (114) to more than cover the 28% (inc Don't Knows) of SNP voters who said it made them more likely to vote SNP (103).

So his statement "SNP voters say they’re MORE likely to vote for the SNP specifically because of a policy that they themselves think puts women in danger" can be (perhaps appositely) summed up in one word - bollocks.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There was an amendment just rejected about everyone getting a say.

There is your reason right there. Not debating the issues, just trying to sabotage democracy. I guess once you start down that road it’s easy to keep going.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

Away from the actual issue and going off on a political tangent for a second, it seems the Tories are desperate to try and force the resignation (or not) of Kate Forbes.

Philip Sim @BBCPhilipSim

Row about process continues: almost descending into a sort of filibuster as Conservative MSPs rise to request a range of different ministerial statements tomorrow instead of the scheduled gender reform debate, presumably all with the same result of pushing it into January

Aiui, if it goes to January, she can't avoid the vote by being on maternity leave.

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There is your reason right there. Not debating the issues, just trying to sabotage democracy. I guess once you start down that road it’s easy to keep going.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought you would be outraged that an amendment to allow everyone to have a say was rejected. Democracy and all that stuff. 😉

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Away from the actual issue and going off on a political tangent for a second, it seems the Tories are desperate to try and force the resignation (or not) of Kate Forbes.



Aiui, if it goes to January, she can't avoid the vote by being on maternity leave.

There is the introduction of a proxy vote system at the start of next year.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Away from the actual issue and going off on a political tangent for a second, it seems the Tories are desperate to try and force the resignation (or not) of Kate Forbes.



Aiui, if it goes to January, she can't avoid the vote by being on maternity leave.

You mean it’s not about women’s rights? Shocked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You mean it’s not about women’s rights? Shocked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of course that's one side of the coin, the other side is the SNP are railroading this through before Xmas to avoid having to sack Kate Forbes. But all about women's rights and not having to sack a front bench minister. Shocked.

Even a quick listen shows the legislation is flawed. Basic definitions are missing.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Of course that's one side of the coin, the other side is the SNP are railroading this through before Xmas to avoid having to sack Kate Forbes. But all about women's rights and not having to sack a front bench minister.

Even a quick listen shows the legislation is flawed. Basic definitions are missing.

Yes, the whole thing is rushed right enough. Isn’t this one of the most consulted bits of legislation brought before Holyrood? Think the rushed accusation just doesn’t stack up against the facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, the whole thing is rushed right enough. Isn’t this one of the most consulted bits of legislation brought before Holyrood? Think the rushed accusation just doesn’t stack up against the facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A quick listen would show you the legislation itself is flawed, the process has been consulted on but the parliamentary process can be counted in single digits in terms of the number of weeks. There was an emergency session last night and they are saying the debate could last until midnight tonight, so the facts do stack up this is being rushed through Parliament. So much for a family friendly Parliament having debates going on until midnight, if I remember correctly there were a number of MSPs standing down as they struggled to fit the work around family and caring responsibility. Having emergency sessions and debates at midnight doesn't sound like a Bill that's had the time it needs.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, the whole thing is rushed right enough. Isn’t this one of the most consulted bits of legislation brought before Holyrood? Think the rushed accusation just doesn’t stack up against the facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Opposition is split between the principled and those gleefully seeking an anti-Indy wedge issue. Pretty clear we're getting both on this thread as well as in the parliament.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There is the introduction of a proxy vote system at the start of next year.

Thanks.