Where are you on the whole gender thing?

[Simian]

A convicted trans person goes to a prison of the choosing of a panel, this has been the case for a while now.

What the point of the new law then if a panel can decide they are not a woman after all?

The new bill in Scotland did little more than make it easier to get your birth certificate changed, though you'd think the sky was falling due to some of the reaction to it.

This is what I just don’t get about the uproar around it. It’s wild.

[Dogbert]

Whenever Society changes legislation that relate in anyway to sexual orientation , there always seems to be uproar.

When I grew up Homosexuality was still illegal in Scotland , although decriminalised in England and Wales in 1967 , the same legislation was only passed for Scotland in 1980.

There was uproar around Section 28 - whuch was only repealed in 2003- I remember the days of the Mail & Telegraph supporting Section 28 as a way to protect children from "predatory homosexuals" and for advocates seeking to "indoctrinate" vulnerable young people into homosexuality.

Same sex marriage legalised 2014 - uproar again from the usual suspects.

Frankly none of the above really impacted me as a white hetrosexual male - but I still see all the legalisation of Homosexualiry / Gay Marraige etc as good progressive moves , and society hasn't collapsed - as was predicted by certain sections. possibly the same sections that are in uproar today.-

The GRA was backed by all potical parties win the Scottish parliament , with the exception of the onservatives , and even then then a previous leader (Carlaw ) and the current Shadow Health Spokesmen - Dr. Sandesh Gulhane both voted in favour.

[Slick]

This is the thing, Dogbert, and a brilliant point made. Pretty much 50% of my current group of friends are gay, I obviously 100% agree with gay marriage. I have 2 very good trans mates, 1 of which I like to think I have supported for over 15 years of her transition as a really good friend.

But I can’t quite square this circle, whilst also a huge supporter of women’s rights and women’s spaces. I never felt there was a coherent or relevant other side to gay rights, it was an obvious slam dunk to me, but this seems so much more complicated, and perhaps there has to be a loser. I don’t know.

[dpedin]

This is the thing, Dogbert, and a brilliant point made. Pretty much 50% of my current group of friends are gay, I obviously 100% agree with gay marriage. I have 2 very good trans mates, 1 of which I like to think I have supported for over 15 years of her transition as a really good friend.

But I can’t quite square this circle, whilst also a huge supporter of women’s rights and women’s spaces. I never felt there was a coherent or relevant other side to gay rights, it was an obvious slam dunk to me, but this seems so much more complicated, and perhaps there has to be a loser. I don’t know.

The thing that pisses me off is the use of the 'what if' type issues that then focus very specific and often rare extremes and often ignore the reality of the world we live in. When one of my kids was young and at nursery, about 25 years ago, a couple of middle class Edinburgh mums got a bee in their bonnet about one of the male nursery nurses being gay and putting their child at 'risk'. Meetings and emails arose, temperatures went up and it wasn't edifying to say the least. I was furious about the bigoted behaviour and some even wanted the poor nursery guy sacked. I took great joy in telling them that statistically their husbands were more likely to abuse their kids than a gay nursery nurse and how did they know that their husbands could be trusted. I also suggested that the private schools that many planned to send their kids to had a dubious reputation to say the least when it came to child abuse. To say I wasn't popular is an understatement! Over 90% of child abuse is perpetrated by a parent, relative or family friend and c90% of women are raped by someone they know usually an acquaintance or a partner.

In this big bad world no gov can legislate for every circumstance and the current debate around trans folk in Scotland is a good example of that - the myriad of individual circumstances is huge. However we have to accept that no matter what the law says there will be individual cases which will need more detailed examination and dealt with on a case by case basis. There will inevitably be some 'game playing' of the new laws y. individuals until they are bedded in. We know well that individuals who wish to do harm to kids or women or whoever will do whatever is required in order to get close to their targets - look at the historical cases paedophiles getting jobs as teachers, school janitors, social workers, care home workers, policemen, TV and radio hosts, etc. This is why we have vetting processes for anyone who has direct contact with children and vulnerable adults. All any gov can do is make laws that are the right thing to do, and in this case the Scot Gov has done that and had support from a cross party majority, then ensure it is implemented as properly and as fairly as possible and deal with the inevitable 'what ifs' type scenarios as they arise. History tells us it will settle down and become the norm pretty quickly.

[Sandstorm]

I took great joy in telling them that statistically their husbands were more likely to abuse their kids than a gay nursery nurse and how did they know that their husbands could be trusted. I also suggested that the private schools that many planned to send their kids to had a dubious reputation to say the least when it came to child abuse. To say I wasn't popular is an understatement!

Legend

[Random1]

The new bill in Scotland did little more than make it easier to get your birth certificate changed, though you'd think the sky was falling due to some of the reaction to it.

Same question

The practicalities of the changes are set out in the FAQs I posted on the previous page.

On a day to day basis it affects things like pension arrangements and payments, death certificates etc - things non-trans people take for granted, it's about equality

https://www.scottishtrans.org/our-work/ ... 2/gra-faq/

It’s not about equality though is it?

If it were about equality, the conversation would start with why women get preferential pension rights in the first place.

The practical result of this is that more men will claim to be women to game the system, and the Scottish law is trying to make that a clerical formality.

[Random1]

This is the thing, Dogbert, and a brilliant point made. Pretty much 50% of my current group of friends are gay, I obviously 100% agree with gay marriage. I have 2 very good trans mates, 1 of which I like to think I have supported for over 15 years of her transition as a really good friend.

But I can’t quite square this circle, whilst also a huge supporter of women’s rights and women’s spaces. I never felt there was a coherent or relevant other side to gay rights, it was an obvious slam dunk to me, but this seems so much more complicated, and perhaps there has to be a loser. I don’t know.

The thing that pisses me off is the use of the 'what if' type issues that then focus very specific and often rare extremes and often ignore the reality of the world we live in. When one of my kids was young and at nursery, about 25 years ago, a couple of middle class Edinburgh mums got a bee in their bonnet about one of the male nursery nurses being gay and putting their child at 'risk'. Meetings and emails arose, temperatures went up and it wasn't edifying to say the least. I was furious about the bigoted behaviour and some even wanted the poor nursery guy sacked. I took great joy in telling them that statistically their husbands were more likely to abuse their kids than a gay nursery nurse and how did they know that their husbands could be trusted. I also suggested that the private schools that many planned to send their kids to had a dubious reputation to say the least when it came to child abuse. To say I wasn't popular is an understatement! Over 90% of child abuse is perpetrated by a parent, relative or family friend and c90% of women are raped by someone they know usually an acquaintance or a partner.

In this big bad world no gov can legislate for every circumstance and the current debate around trans folk in Scotland is a good example of that - the myriad of individual circumstances is huge. However we have to accept that no matter what the law says there will be individual cases which will need more detailed examination and dealt with on a case by case basis. There will inevitably be some 'game playing' of the new laws y. individuals until they are bedded in. We know well that individuals who wish to do harm to kids or women or whoever will do whatever is required in order to get close to their targets - look at the historical cases paedophiles getting jobs as teachers, school janitors, social workers, care home workers, policemen, TV and radio hosts, etc. This is why we have vetting processes for anyone who has direct contact with children and vulnerable adults. All any gov can do is make laws that are the right thing to do, and in this case the Scot Gov has done that and had support from a cross party majority, then ensure it is implemented as properly and as fairly as possible and deal with the inevitable 'what ifs' type scenarios as they arise. History tells us it will settle down and become the norm pretty quickly.

You have to use ‘what if’ scenarios for legislation. There’s no other way of assessing if it’s a good law.

For example, we’re using ‘what if’ examples for climate change. Or what if examples for military spend. That’s literally the job of the government; to try and resolve an existing or future issue without unduly harming the future by minimising unforeseen consequences. It’s basic risk management.

[Tichtheid]

British women hit by gender pension gap at every stage of career

28 Jul 2021
Full press releases
Gender pension gap is 17% at the beginning of women’s careers and reaches 56% at retirement compared to men
Average pension pot of a woman at retirement (£10,000) found to be less than half that of a man (£21,000)
Stark pension gap even in female-dominated industries

https://group.legalandgeneral.com/en/ne ... -of-career

Also

"The state pension age (SPA) is presently 65 for men. Under the Pensions Act 1995, the SPA for women is being incrementally increased from 60 to 65. The Pensions Act 2011 will raise the SPA to 66 for both men and women by 6 October 2020."

[Random1]

Whenever Society changes legislation that relate in anyway to sexual orientation , there always seems to be uproar.

When I grew up Homosexuality was still illegal in Scotland , although decriminalised in England and Wales in 1967 , the same legislation was only passed for Scotland in 1980.

There was uproar around Section 28 - whuch was only repealed in 2003- I remember the days of the Mail & Telegraph supporting Section 28 as a way to protect children from "predatory homosexuals" and for advocates seeking to "indoctrinate" vulnerable young people into homosexuality.

Same sex marriage legalised 2014 - uproar again from the usual suspects.

Frankly none of the above really impacted me as a white hetrosexual male - but I still see all the legalisation of Homosexualiry / Gay Marraige etc as good progressive moves , and society hasn't collapsed - as was predicted by certain sections. possibly the same sections that are in uproar today.-

The GRA was backed by all potical parties win the Scottish parliament , with the exception of the onservatives , and even then then a previous leader (Carlaw ) and the current Shadow Health Spokesmen - Dr. Sandesh Gulhane both voted in favour.

Now, I don’t often talk in behalf on the trans lobby, but they tend to point out that gender and sexuality are very different things. Many trans women (last big study I saw said 60%) of trans women are attracted to women for example.

They’re two different topics.

[Random1]

British women hit by gender pension gap at every stage of career

28 Jul 2021
Full press releases
Gender pension gap is 17% at the beginning of women’s careers and reaches 56% at retirement compared to men
Average pension pot of a woman at retirement (£10,000) found to be less than half that of a man (£21,000)
Stark pension gap even in female-dominated industries

https://group.legalandgeneral.com/en/ne ... -of-career

There are good reasons for this, but it’s probably best not to get off topic, so I’ll ask the obvious question- so how does changing gender recognition to make things easier solve this problem? It doesn’t improve pension equality at all does it?

[inactionman]

Police at the gates today to protect us all from 2 middle aged women handing out leaflets.

Why does this feel a bit father ted?

[inactionman]

apols for quoting a post from 3 days back, just catching up on thread.

[Tichtheid]

British women hit by gender pension gap at every stage of career

28 Jul 2021
Full press releases
Gender pension gap is 17% at the beginning of women’s careers and reaches 56% at retirement compared to men
Average pension pot of a woman at retirement (£10,000) found to be less than half that of a man (£21,000)
Stark pension gap even in female-dominated industries

https://group.legalandgeneral.com/en/ne ... -of-career

There are good reasons for this, but it’s probably best not to get off topic, so I’ll ask the obvious question- so how does changing gender recognition to make things easier solve this problem? It doesn’t improve pension equality at all does it?

Either this is wilful or stupid.

The equality is the ease of procedure.

I have a friend who worked with MPs to draft a bill regarding trans people and pensions some years ago, that was why there would be "gender at birth" questions on some forms.

[Random1]

British women hit by gender pension gap at every stage of career

28 Jul 2021
Full press releases
Gender pension gap is 17% at the beginning of women’s careers and reaches 56% at retirement compared to men
Average pension pot of a woman at retirement (£10,000) found to be less than half that of a man (£21,000)
Stark pension gap even in female-dominated industries

https://group.legalandgeneral.com/en/ne ... -of-career

There are good reasons for this, but it’s probably best not to get off topic, so I’ll ask the obvious question- so how does changing gender recognition to make things easier solve this problem? It doesn’t improve pension equality at all does it?

Either this is wilful or stupid.

The equality is the ease of procedure.

I have a friend who worked with MPs to draft a bill regarding trans people and pensions some years ago, that was why there would be "gender at birth" questions on some forms.

No need for insults - I’m a fairly smart guy trying to have a discussion about nuanced matters.

I don’t understand why it is a matter of equality, if the intent is to have better purchase in an existing inequality.

By all means, I can understand why they want to do it, but don’t label it as equality.

[robmatic]

British women hit by gender pension gap at every stage of career

28 Jul 2021
Full press releases
Gender pension gap is 17% at the beginning of women’s careers and reaches 56% at retirement compared to men
Average pension pot of a woman at retirement (£10,000) found to be less than half that of a man (£21,000)
Stark pension gap even in female-dominated industries

https://group.legalandgeneral.com/en/ne ... -of-career

There are good reasons for this, but it’s probably best not to get off topic, so I’ll ask the obvious question- so how does changing gender recognition to make things easier solve this problem? It doesn’t improve pension equality at all does it?

Either this is wilful or stupid.

The equality is the ease of procedure.

I have a friend who worked with MPs to draft a bill regarding trans people and pensions some years ago, that was why there would be "gender at birth" questions on some forms.

Occupational pensions have had gender equality in terms of their rules since 1990. The reason there is a 'gender pension gap' is because women get paid less, hence the contributions are lower. I'm not sure that self ID solves that problem.

[Tichtheid]

Occupational pensions have had gender equality in terms of their rules since 1990. The reason there is a 'gender pension gap' is because women get paid less, hence the contributions are lower. I'm not sure that self ID solves that problem.

The point of me posting that was in response to the completely erroneous claim, and I quote, "women get preferential pension rights"

[Tichtheid]

and the point about equality of process brought about by the GRC is in things like being able to put your gender down on marriage certificates.

The pensions issue comes about in terms of survivor benefits and lump sums etc.

This doesn't affect many people, but again, the sky is falling in according to some.

[robmatic]

and the point about equality of process brought about by the GRC is in things like being able to put your gender down on marriage certificates.

The pensions issue comes about in terms of survivor benefits and lump sums etc.

This doesn't affect many people, but again, the sky is falling in according to some.

Survivor benefits and lump sums aren't affected by gender identity.

[Random1]

Occupational pensions have had gender equality in terms of their rules since 1990. The reason there is a 'gender pension gap' is because women get paid less, hence the contributions are lower. I'm not sure that self ID solves that problem.

The point of me posting that was in response to the completely erroneous claim, and I quote, "women get preferential pension rights"

It isn’t an erroneous statement.

Here’s the official government page on the additional rights a trans woman (of a certain age) gets upon transition under the existing laws.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/apply-for-b ... nder-woman

To be fair, I understand what you’re driving at; you’re thinking the pension system is not fair to women because the outcome of the system is that women get less pension.

And this is one of the fundamental differences in relation to all of the day’s hot topics; the idea of equity rather than equality is dependent upon outcome, not opportunity.

As robmatic says, women have the same opportunity to get the pensions as men, but they’d have to make different choices.

But that’s a really big topic, as I’m sure you’d combat that point by raising the patriarchy and social constructs.

It’s a great topic to discuss and is one of the most important philosophical debates of our time, but I didn’t want to divert from the gender aspect, because this isn’t my Fred.

[Tichtheid]

and the point about equality of process brought about by the GRC is in things like being able to put your gender down on marriage certificates.

The pensions issue comes about in terms of survivor benefits and lump sums etc.

This doesn't affect many people, but again, the sky is falling in according to some.

Survivor benefits and lump sums aren't affected by gender identity.

Gender bias is on the way down

The DWP’s guidance makes note of survivor benefits in some occupational schemes. These are paid out to surviving spouses of deceased scheme members. It observes that “gender and sexual orientation can also affect survivor benefit provision”.

It adds that in England and Wales, under the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, “there is provision that a surviving spouse whose deceased spouse legally changed gender during the marriage will still be able to qualify for a survivor benefit on the same basis as they would have done before the legal change of gender”. Scottish marriages are also protected.

Daniel Taylor, director at administrator Trafalgar House, says that it is now quite rare to see “gender bias” in survivor benefits. But gender discrimination does take place in other aspects of occupational schemes.

“There are some common actuarial factors that have a gender bias,” he says. “With transfer values and lump sum commutation, those calculations will be based on whether you’re a man or a woman,” he adds.

Transfers can be intrusive for transgender members

Jon Sharp, director at consultancy Western Pension Solutions, has been involved in obtaining a transfer value for a transgender man at a defined benefit occupational scheme. The member identified as a male at the point of transfer, but was recognised as female at the date of accruing service.

In the absence of formal regulatory process, the transfer value was calculated using male mortality rate assumptions, along with the fact that he had been female when the benefits were accrued.

Sharp’s team engaged with the trustees and their lawyers throughout the process. He said: “The trustee’s lawyers were of the view that you don’t change your benefits by changing your gender, which I can understand, because obviously some benefits were more generous in the past.”

He added: “I suppose that there’s a concern that somebody could change their gender to claim a higher pension.”

The team had to collect the member’s birth certificate and the date upon which the member changed gender, alongside the request, “which I felt was quite an intrusive thing to say – can you provide evidence of when this took place?” Sharp said.

He called for a legislative rethink that would protect members from intrusion.

“I wonder on this one whether you could simply get it to the point where you said, ‘Okay, benefits in the past might change, but the gender of the member just is the gender of the member’, and you don’t have to go back into, ‘What was it when you accrued your pension’,” he said.

Suzanna Hopwood, a member of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender charity Stonewall’s trans advisory group, said: “What they have to do is to throw themselves on the mercy of the pension provider and allow their discretion when they share this information, which can actually draw them out of what’s called ‘stealth’ – they’ve been living a life with nobody necessarily knowing about it.”

Hopwood said pensions engagement in the trans community is extremely low, and holds concerns over inadequate understanding from a provider’s perspective. “This is a developing area, and not many people have got much experience of it,” she said.

The DWP’s position could be discriminatory

A spokesperson from the Gender Identity Research & Education Society welcomed the DWP’s attempt to assist transgender individuals.

Pension law slowly catches up with society on equal rights
The Supreme Court has overruled the Equalities Act 2010 in Walker v Innospec, meaning pension schemes can no longer refuse pensions to same-sex spouses for pre-2005 service.
Read more
However, the spokesperson said the document fell short in providing advice for those without a gender recognition certificate.

“It makes no mention of a current case in the European court of justice relating to those who have undergone gender reassignment who do not hold a GRC.”

The case considers the plight of "MB", a transgender woman whose application for the state pension was rejected on the basis that she did not have a full gender recognition certificate. In 1995, at the time of her gender reassignment, UK legislation required the annulment of her marriage before applying for the certificate, since same sex marriage was not permitted.

“This case, which is at the opinion stage, may eventually indicate that the DWP's present position is discriminatory. The DWP might perhaps have alerted potential claimants to be aware of the possibility of a change in the pension rules.”

The DWP did not respond to a request for comment.

https://www.pensions-expert.com/Law-Reg ... on?ct=true

[Ymx]

The practicalities of the changes are set out in the FAQs I posted on the previous page.

On a day to day basis it affects things like pension arrangements and payments, death certificates etc - things non-trans people take for granted, it's about equality

https://www.scottishtrans.org/our-work/ ... 2/gra-faq/

The FAQ’s you keep leaning on don’t seem to cover when public opinion changes implementation

ffs, I was merely answering your fucking question as to what the point of the bill was.

There's no need to be a wanker about it.

And you’re clearly identifying as menstruating at the moment.

Slightly OTT reaction.

[Tichtheid]

The FAQ’s you keep leaning on don’t seem to cover when public opinion changes implementation

ffs, I was merely answering your fucking question as to what the point of the bill was.

There's no need to be a wanker about it.

And you’re clearly identifying as menstruating at the moment.

Slightly OTT reaction.

Way to go on the sexism.

[Ymx]

ffs, I was merely answering your fucking question as to what the point of the bill was.

There's no need to be a wanker about it.

And you’re clearly identifying as menstruating at the moment.

Slightly OTT reaction.

Way to go on the sexism.

Pffft, you are such a dinosaur.

[troglodiet]

There are only 2 sexes: male and females (hermies = unfortunate mistake by nature).

There are basically 3 sexualities: heterosexual, homosexual and bi-sexual. All the new variations of sexualities are basically some version of these 3, but with personality now also entering the equation.

The biggest mistake and reason for this new fashion is people conflating sex and sexuality. (Sex is also known as gender. They are not 2 different concepts as some want us to believe).


I will change my mind if the following 3 things happen:

1) a pre-op trans male is peeing at the urinal next to me (standing, and no device eg. a funnel is used)

2) a pre-op trans male giving birth naturally

3) a trans male athlete winning a major sporting event - athletics or swimming, no team sports.

[Blackmac]

apols for quoting a post from 3 days back, just catching up on thread.

To be fair it needs quoting because that is an appalling over reaction to the situation and the police should be ashamed. That's what often angers me more than anything else about this debate, its the inability for all sides to be reasonable and the total overreaction and faux fucking outrage. The school offering support to grown bloody adults who have been offered a leaflet, FFS, absolute twats. And you can just imagine all the bloody bollocks being spouted on that school Whatsapp group as they all try an outdo each other with their indignation.

[sockwithaticket]

apols for quoting a post from 3 days back, just catching up on thread.

To be fair it needs quoting because that is an appalling over reaction to the situation and the police should be ashamed. That's what often angers me more than anything else about this debate, its the inability for all sides to be reasonable and the total overreaction and faux fucking outrage. The school offering support to grown bloody adults who have been offered a leaflet, FFS, absolute twats. And you can just imagine all the bloody bollocks being spouted on that school Whatsapp group as they all try an outdo each other with their indignation.

Yup provides something for those so inclined to point at and claim that they're being silenced.

[Slick]

apols for quoting a post from 3 days back, just catching up on thread.

To be fair it needs quoting because that is an appalling over reaction to the situation and the police should be ashamed. That's what often angers me more than anything else about this debate, its the inability for all sides to be reasonable and the total overreaction and faux fucking outrage. The school offering support to grown bloody adults who have been offered a leaflet, FFS, absolute twats. And you can just imagine all the bloody bollocks being spouted on that school Whatsapp group as they all try an outdo each other with their indignation.

Which was exactly what happened

[Blackmac]

Tiffany Scott: Call to block trans prisoner's move to women's jail https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64438457

This prick is considered one of the most dangerous and unpredictable prisoners in the Scottish prison system. Even the most hardened nutcases in the male prisons avoid him like the plague. I'm sure he will be a delight in a women's prison.

Apologies "persons who identify as female" prison.

[sockwithaticket]

Tiffany Scott: Call to block trans prisoner's move to women's jail https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64438457

This prick is considered one of the most dangerous and unpredictable prisoners in the Scottish prison system. Even the most hardened nutcases in the male prisons avoid him like the plague. I'm sure he will be a delight in a women's prison.

Apologies "persons who identify as female" prison.

Sounds like they shouldn't be around people generally, but definitely not among women, the vast majority of whom, this person would be able to overpower due to sex differences.

[Blackmac]

Tiffany Scott: Call to block trans prisoner's move to women's jail https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64438457

This prick is considered one of the most dangerous and unpredictable prisoners in the Scottish prison system. Even the most hardened nutcases in the male prisons avoid him like the plague. I'm sure he will be a delight in a women's prison.

Apologies "persons who identify as female" prison.

Sounds like they shouldn't be around people generally, but definitely not among women, the vast majority of whom, this person would be able to overpower due to sex differences.

It's odd that the SG had clearly personally intervened in the rapists prison allocation however we are now back to the "Scottish Prison Service decision" etc, nonsense.

[Calculon]

Pretty disgraceful if this is accurate

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/ex-p ... n=sharebar

[Torquemada 1420]

Pretty disgraceful if this is accurate

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/ex-p ... n=sharebar

I suspect it's pretty accurate and is a perfect example of this madness. There is something deeply ironical that women's' rights are actually being dangerously reversed in circumstances like this because they are no longer as fashionably edgy by those so desperate to be seen as right on.

[Big D]

Tiffany Scott: Call to block trans prisoner's move to women's jail https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64438457

This prick is considered one of the most dangerous and unpredictable prisoners in the Scottish prison system. Even the most hardened nutcases in the male prisons avoid him like the plague. I'm sure he will be a delight in a women's prison.

Apologies "persons who identify as female" prison.

Sounds like they shouldn't be around people generally, but definitely not among women, the vast majority of whom, this person would be able to overpower due to sex differences.

It's odd that the SG had clearly personally intervened in the rapists prison allocation however we are now back to the "Scottish Prison Service decision" etc, nonsense.

This was all so predictable and really should have been considered by the SG and included in any discussion/law on trans rights and issues.

It is a pretty complicated topic (trans rights) but the two cases that have been public recently should have been known as something that needed considered.

[Sandstorm]

apols for quoting a post from 3 days back, just catching up on thread.

To be fair it needs quoting because that is an appalling over reaction to the situation and the police should be ashamed. That's what often angers me more than anything else about this debate, its the inability for all sides to be reasonable and the total overreaction and faux fucking outrage. The school offering support to grown bloody adults who have been offered a leaflet, FFS, absolute twats. And you can just imagine all the bloody bollocks being spouted on that school Whatsapp group as they all try an outdo each other with their indignation.

Maybe they’re worried their kids will be affected by the leaflet droppers outside the gates?

[Random1]

Sounds like they shouldn't be around people generally, but definitely not among women, the vast majority of whom, this person would be able to overpower due to sex differences.

It's odd that the SG had clearly personally intervened in the rapists prison allocation however we are now back to the "Scottish Prison Service decision" etc, nonsense.

This was all so predictable and really should have been considered by the SG and included in any discussion/law on trans rights and issues.

It is a pretty complicated topic (trans rights) but the two cases that have been public recently should have been known as something that needed considered.

It feels like it’s complicated by virtue of the stance the newer trans lobby take. If you get rid of ‘a trans woman or man is a woman or man’ then the whole thing is pretty simple. Use pronouns to be polite, but the repercussions for dead name go, access to women’s areas go.

[tc27]

One one hand trans legislation is giving people more rights which is generally a good thing but on the other hand until we live in a Ian M Banks level society where people can re-write their own DNA and physiology at will and bad faith actors can be flowed around by an AI drone stopping them being naughty its not going to work. Also I think enough women object to trans women accessing their spaces that IMO not acceptable to force them to accept.

I am not a fan of Sturgeon but she normally handles interviews quite well - here she's in such an absurd position though:



If a trans women is always a women accept for some 'contexts' then clearly its absurd to pretend its a fundamental right.

[Paddington Bear]

She clearly knows she’s defending a bollocks position, probably believed no one of any status would call her on it. A shame that an issue that 90%+ of people would probably engage in in good faith, concerns would be worked through and a proper resolution reached is handled in such a ridiculous manner. This isn’t just a criticism of Sturgeon, she’s just in the unfortunate position of being the first left of centre person to try and implement some of this.

[BnM]

Sturgeon didn't consult though in good faith cherry picking groups/people to consult and hiding it behind it's just a paperwork change and they're doing it already so it makes no difference. One of those already doing it has been the SPS. So the GRR bill isn't to blame for Isla or Tiffany, that's firmly with the SPS and SNP. Harvie, Shona and Maggie have been very absent last few days.

SNP have been toxic to women over last 5 years and a lot of this didn't many affect people so I guess they thought it was ok, it's now blown wide open and could be very costly. Johann Lamont had to table an amendment and got dragged for it, the amendment was so that women could select the sex and not gender of the person doing their rape examination, Greens and lib dems voted against this change of one word. All this has been going on in the background but it's now front and centre.

[weegie01]

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has taken the unprecedented step of criticising UK Athletics for its “inaccurate” interpretation of the law after UKA announced plans for a new transgender policy.

The EHRC’s intervention came hours after UKA said it wanted to ban transgender women from female events on fairness grounds – but it would be too “risky” to do so unless the government changes the law.

However the EHRC, the body responsible for promoting and upholding equality and human rights ideals and laws across England, Scotland and Wales, said that it had told UKA that it was wrong, and that such a ban was justified, beforehand.

It said it had made clear that section 195 of the 2010 Equality Act allows sports to restrict competition in the female category on safety and fairness grounds, a position government sources also reiterated.

“We reached out to UK Athletics and offered to discuss the legal advice underpinning their statement,” the EHRC said. “We are disappointed that they have chosen to publicise their inaccurate advice and we would urge all organisations to consult our website which explains equality law and how it relates to these issues.”

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... law-change

[C69]

Waiting for Godot is my favourite play ever

Fuck you Dutch cnuts