Scottish GRA consultation

[SidJS]

Ends 17th March

Does anyone have the link / email address to submit responses to? All can and need to respond - not just the Scots!

For Women Scotland have recommended to submit responses closer to the end of the deadline. That way if there are any new developments, evidence and court cases, it can be added to our submissions to add more weight. They and other organisations will be publishing their submissions which we can then use to help us write our own if we wish.

Yes, I'm waiting til closer to the deadline.

Also, there is a For Women Scotland event in Edinburgh on 16th Jan if anyone is unaware and interested in attending.

www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/public-meeting-for-women-scotland-tickets-86438938191

Hopefully there will be other ones held elsewhere in Scotland.

Nonny thanks. Let’s keep it topical here so all can have resources to submit. Do you have the link/ email address?

If anyone is in doubt about the seriousness and risk to woman’s rights that we face - the document I’ve linked below is one that has informed the Scottish Government’s GRA proposals. Among the vast number of inaccuracies, untruths, assumptions and nonsense contained, they argue that male bodied Transwomen have ‘non-normative‘ bodies and compares male bodies with women who have mastectomies for breast cancer to rationalise why transwomen should have access to female only facilities.

Section - Abnormal Bodies p11

^ It would be unthinkable that general discomfort could prevent a cisgender woman from using segregated showering facilities after she had a double mastectomy. In reality, UK law tolerates a considerable amount of bodily diversity when cisgender and intersex persons use single-gender spaces. Why are trans persons treated differently? Levasseur suggests that trans bodies are ‘placed in a separate category for display and legal assessment, using sex stereotyping as a compass’ (2014: 1001). If cisgender and intersex persons can use women-only and men-only
services, even when they have non-normative bodies, concerns about bodily diversity do not justify the current legal position under the 2010 Act.
^

As a breast cancer survivor myself - who luckily only had a lumpectomy - I am spitting with rage. Nicola Sturgeon and her ilk call themselves ‘proud feminists’. How dare they. They don’t give a fuck.

research-information.bris.ac.uk/files/139271435/Bristol_Pure_Version_PD.pdf

It's absolutely disgusting, SidJS

More information on where this came from:

"This is Dr Peter Dunne. He’s not a medical doctor. He’s a law lecturer from Bristol. But he gets to dictate to Scotland what a woman is by claiming that penises and mastectomies are basically the same thing. “Non-normative” bits of the female spectrum.
This is deeply fucked up. t.co/eFAhnL9r6q"

twitter.com/1H4ND/status/1214156880777490433?s=19

"Also a member of TELI. So a Trans Rights Activist who presents himself as an impartial scholar."

twitter.com/1H4ND/status/1214217310367559680?s=19

Wow are there any depths the Trans Lobby won't sink to to push their agenda?!

There was a thread in December on the new consultation and it has some interesting info that might help submissions.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3769789-Scottish-GRA-draft-legislation

I'll try to look for an email after dinner if no one else posts it in the meantime.

Good grief.

That's just fucking mental.

Consultation here:

www.gov.scot/publications/gender-recognition-reform-scotland-bill-consultation-scottish-government/

I saw this on twitter.

I'm absolutely astounded that they've forced female breast cancer survivors with male people and their penises into one category of person as if they are somehow comparative.

Every time I think this agenda has hit rock bottom something else pops up to show there is literally no limit to the depths they are willing to plunge.

I suspect that Peter Dunne is cut from the same cloth as Steven Whittle, James Morton, and Jay Stuart.

See also this for similar logic, where MTF trans are considered to have "Absolute Uterine Factor Infertility" like women who have had a hysterectomy or who were born without a womb:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3605548-Imperial-College-Womb-Transplant-Survey-Redux

So a woman with a mastectomy is not to be seen in changing room as she is not a woman

But the same as a trans woman. Did I get that right ?

It’s just totally offensive.

Nicola sturgeon has some cheek calling herself a feminist.

And peter dunne. Who is what to prounce on what is a woman

Cheers peter. Good to know that women who have had mastectomies are really not to be seen

Sure peter. What a tool and an offensive tool you are

So angry. I'm a breast cancer survivor who has had a double mastectomy. Due to the lovely brca2 gene, I'm now also lacking ovaries.
I am a woman. Do not dare equate my lived experience as a woman with someone whose lived experience is as a man.

I've already got my tickets for the 16th!

So what they are basically saying is we shouldn't be allowed to avoid seeing penises by law. Wipe voyeurism and indecent exposure from the statute books. If we don't want to see penises in the changing rooms we're othering women with mastectomies.

So much for "trans women are fragile and won't want anyone to see them naked because dysphoria".

Saw this on twitter today. I am currently having treatment for breast cancer and am boiling with rage about this. It's incomprehensible how they can equate a woman who has had a mastectomy with a male bodied person.

This is why it's not a good idea to refer to males as women.

JulesJules Best wishes for the treatment!

I think I'll go along to the Edinburgh gig

Goodness me I have just seen this and I am... I mean I would say surprised but actually not really given all the other false equivalencies that are bandied about. It's just so grossly offensive.

OvaHere has it right:
Every time I think this agenda has hit rock bottom something else pops up to show there is literally no limit to the depths they are willing to plunge.

concerns about bodily diversity do not justify the current legal position under the 2010 Act.

The, ahem, "bodily diversity" of males in women's spaces isn't the real problem, it's the male behavior patterns. Which are on open display in social media by "bodily diverse" transwomen, not to mention the "it never happens" news stories. It's almost like they're trying to obfuscate this point.

Is there no end to the women who're to be expelled from womanhood on the orders of trans activists in service of the TWAW cause? First women with PCOS, now women with breast cancer. Next they'll be telling us that any woman who happens to have small boobs is actually a man.

I want to respond to this GRA thing, I am against self ID. A birth certificate should state fact, not fiction. I am avoiding public toilets, changing rooms, even accidents - I'm much more careful these days in general (so as not to end up in hospital). I seen that two girls of 10 and 12 were sexually assaulted by a transgender male in toilets in Fife last year and am livid about that.

I want to respond, but I don't know what to say on it etc. Any help/advice would be most welcome, thanks.

The SNP have lost my vote over this.