The Trans Rights Debate

[Kato]

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

[Ozyhibby]

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

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

Especially when they don’t go near the other thread about women’s safety.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

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

Spot on, I would like to here anyone try to defend this a man who rapes to woman as a man, declaring he is now a woman after being charged and being transferred to a woman only prison.

https://www.youtube.com/watch/v=gyl62ABWhuA

Has anyone defended it yet?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[147lothian]

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

Has anyone defended it yet?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Some people defend the Gender Recognition Bill which allows anyone to declare they are a different sex without the need for a medical certificate of gender dysphoria

[Ozyhibby]

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

Some people defend the Gender Recognition Bill which allows anyone to declare they are a different sex without the need for a medical certificate of gender dysphoria

Kelvin Mackenzie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

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

Kelvin Mackenzie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's got species dysphoria, a homo sapien transitioning into a reptile.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

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

He's got species dysphoria, a homo sapien transitioning into a reptile.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Since sapiens means "wise", he left that particular species a while ago.

[Kato]

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

Some people defend the Gender Recognition Bill which allows anyone to declare they are a different sex without the need for a medical certificate of gender dysphoria

Do you watch GB News with your critical faculties switched or as a source of actual news?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

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

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

I doubt anyone would deny the likelihood of attacks on women by trans-people lies further down your list, but when women have long been under threat by more 'palpable' concerns why make another potential route to diminishing their protections easier to access? That's what women are rightly concerned about with this bill. Sturgeon is in the firing line for sure, but only because it was her government which brought the bill to life.

[Kato]

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

I doubt anyone would deny the likelihood of attacks on women by trans-people lies further down your list, but when women have long been under threat by more 'palpable' concerns why make another potential route to diminishing their protections easier to access? That's what women are rightly concerned about with this bill. Sturgeon is in the firing line for sure, but only because it was her government which brought the bill to life.

You're not persuading me on your level of concern re- women's safety by doubling down on the, mainly hypothetical, threat to women from trans people when a woman or three have probably been harrased or assaulted by men in the time it has taken me to write this post.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

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

Has anyone defended it yet?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

No rational person could defend him IMHO but as already mentioned an amendment to the SG bill which would in future have explicitly forbidden men like 'Isla' from applying to change their sex while on or awaiting trial for rape (or other sexual offences) was inexplicably voted down.

MSPs scoffing at the idea of sex offenders trying to get GRCs in bad faith seems baffling when they then go on to object to an amendment which would prevent sex offenders getting a GRC in bad faith.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

No rational person could defend him IMHO but as already mentioned an amendment to the SG bill which would in future have explicitly forbidden men like 'Isla' from applying to change their sex while on or awaiting trial for rape (or other sexual offences) was inexplicably voted down.

MSPs scoffing at the idea of sex offenders trying to get GRCs in bad faith seems baffling when they then go on to object to an amendment which would prevent sex offenders getting a GRC in bad faith.

The justification for that being voted down was that, until found guilty, they're not sex offenders in the eyes of the law at that point. That is why that amendment was replaced by the later one.

[He's here!]

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

The justification for that being voted down was that, until found guilty, they're not sex offenders in the eyes of the law at that point. That is why that amendment was replaced by the later one.

Might be wrong, but I thought the amendment stipulated that the accused would be prevented from seeking to change gender until their case was concluded?

[He's here!]

Interesting article (especially prescient when it alludes to the 'hurricane' coming Scotland's way) from a few years back by a trans-woman about what led to the current furore:

The inconvenient truth about transwomen - UnHerd

These paragraphs stands out:

The inconvenient truth is that transwomen are male, and — as a group — we present the same hazard that men present. Women can no more differentiate nice trans from nasty trans than they can distinguish nice men from nasty men. Allowing us to declare ourselves to be trans and then immediately self-identify into women’s spaces makes the boundaries meaningless. It is a safeguarding nightmare.

While the Scottish government may claim in their consultation (Para 3.20) that they do “not wish trans people to go through procedures which are demeaning, intrusive, distressing and stressful”, it’s a matter of debate whether being asked to provide medical evidence of a need to change your legal sex is demeaning. I don’t think it is, though like many trans people I have never felt the need to change the sex on my birth certificate in any case. We shouldn’t need to lie about the past in order to live in the present.

[Ozyhibby]

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

Interesting article (especially prescient when it alludes to the 'hurricane' coming Scotland's way) from a few years back by a trans-woman about what led to the current furore:

The inconvenient truth about transwomen - UnHerd

These paragraphs stands out:

The inconvenient truth is that transwomen are male, and — as a group — we present the same hazard that men present. Women can no more differentiate nice trans from nasty trans than they can distinguish nice men from nasty men. Allowing us to declare ourselves to be trans and then immediately self-identify into women’s spaces makes the boundaries meaningless. It is a safeguarding nightmare.

While the Scottish government may claim in their consultation (Para 3.20) that they do “not wish trans people to go through procedures which are demeaning, intrusive, distressing and stressful”, it’s a matter of debate whether being asked to provide medical evidence of a need to change your legal sex is demeaning. I don’t think it is, though like many trans people I have never felt the need to change the sex on my birth certificate in any case. We shouldn’t need to lie about the past in order to live in the present.

Has this hurricane hit Ireland yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibby rae]

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

Has this hurricane hit Ireland yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What was it Kezia Dugdale pointed out? Given similar legislation exists in a lot of other countries you have a possible case study from a combined population of approx. 300m (?) to pull data from, yet nothing has happened in those countries.

[Kato]

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

Has this hurricane hit Ireland yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's impossible to compare those countries. It would be like comparing a potato to a tumshie.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

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

It's impossible to compare those countries. It would be like comparing a potato to a tumshie.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Fair enough, best they get back to shouting sex offender and trans in the same sentence as much as possible and see if that works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

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

Fair enough, best they get back to shouting sex offender and trans in the same sentence as much as possible and see if that works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You really are not liking this one bit, a niche subject that the public don't care about was your analysis. How is that working out?

Quickly forgot about you said, how is that working out?

Nobody really cares?

As pointed out time after time it seems only you and others linking trans people to sex offenders. Even your beloved SNP were shouting down people who keep doing this, and guess what it wasn't people opposed to the Bill it was those like you supporting it who were shouted down by the SNP.

[Moulin Yarns]

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

It's impossible to compare those countries. It would be like comparing a potato to a tumshie.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

I think you know your onions 👍

[Ozyhibby]

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

You really are not liking this one bit, a niche subject that the public don't care about was your analysis. How is that working out?

Quickly forgot about you said, how is that working out?

Nobody really cares?

As pointed out time after time it seems only you and others linking trans people to sex offenders. Even your beloved SNP were shouting down people who keep doing this, and guess what it wasn't people opposed to the Bill it was those like you supporting it who were shouted down by the SNP.

My analysis is still the same. The public still don’t care about this issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AgentDaleCooper]

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

Some people defend the Gender Recognition Bill which allows anyone to declare they are a different sex without the need for a medical certificate of gender dysphoria

There's no way I'm going to watch anything involving that absolute snake. The most disingenuous ****** on the planet.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

There's no way I'm going to watch anything involving that absolute snake. The most disingenuous ****** on the planet.

C'mon now......Snake rights matter.

[archie]

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

The justification for that being voted down was that, until found guilty, they're not sex offenders in the eyes of the law at that point. That is why that amendment was replaced by the later one.

Except the state can place restrictions on someone accused of a crime. Remand is a restriction of liberty.

[archie]

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

The rhetorical habit of mentioning both groups in the same sentence every day, day after day leads to a conflation. There doesn't have to be intent from the writer, the repeated juxtaposition is enough to trigger some folk toward hatred.

Do you monitor every social platform?

What reason would you say there is to explain the increase in hate crimes?


Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

I think some care is needed with your use of 'hate crimes'. These are self reported and can be subject to a very wide interpretation. I'm not diminishing the issue, but you need to be clearer what you are actually referring to.

[Stairway 2 7]

Closer than I thought


Redfield & Wilton Strategies
@RedfieldWilton
·
1h
Do Britons support or oppose the decision of the UK Government to block the gender reform legislation passed by the Scottish parliament? (18 January)

Support 48%
Oppose 21%

Glad only 14% said they shouldn't

RedfieldWilton
1h
At what age do British voters believe people should be allowed to decide to legally change their gender? (18 January)

16: 13%
18: 31%
21: 22%
25: 11%
Never: 14%
Don't know: 9%

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Except the state can place restrictions on someone accused of a crime. Remand is a restriction of liberty.

Not disagreeing with that. Just interpreting what happened. IIRC, there was some mention of EHRC issues that would have conflicted with the proposed amendment.

[Kato]

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

I think some care is needed with your use of 'hate crimes'. These are self reported and can be subject to a very wide interpretation. I'm not diminishing the issue, but you need to be clearer what you are actually referring to.

I don't need to do that at all actually but the stats are in this article.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ster-scotland/

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[TrumpIsAPeado]

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

Again, 'any man' who did that without a GRC would not have the law on his side should he be challenged over his presence there.

Again, a GRC does not grant special legal privileges to people who commit such offences. Saying that a GRC would somehow put the law on their side is based on absolutely nothing whatsoever.

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

The 'Isla Bryson' case, while not relating directly to the bill, does indicate the lengths sexual predators will go to turn a situation to their advantage

What advantage? The person in question is going to jail. The same person in question will be isolated from the general prison population as sex offenders generally are. Having a GRC doesn't change any of that.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

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

Closer than I thought


Redfield & Wilton Strategies
@RedfieldWilton
·
1h
Do Britons support or oppose the decision of the UK Government to block the gender reform legislation passed by the Scottish parliament? (18 January)

Support 48%
Oppose 21%

Glad only 14% said they shouldn't

RedfieldWilton
1h
At what age do British voters believe people should be allowed to decide to legally change their gender? (18 January)

16: 13%
18: 31%
21: 22%
25: 11%
Never: 14%
Don't know: 9%

A British poll backing the British Government over the Scottish Government. Shockaroonie.