Responses to Scottish Govt GRA consultation now online

For information

163 responses from organisations
12 did not wish to be published
1 did not say they were for or against but did make some interesting legal points (Faculty of advocates)
115 in favour of self id
35 against

now we wait for the individual responses and the Scottish Governments analysis

No one is debating 'existence' - when will they get that into their silly little heads?

Or does that just come from chapter one, page one of the 'Poor Wee Me Playbook and Guidelines (subtitle: how to get your own way on aoat everything)'. What next - holding breath until you turn blue, sqweeming and sqweeming until you are sick?

Exist all you like - but be what you are and don't try to take over another groups hard fought for space.

Quite!

This Consultation response was developed by a sub-group of the Collective led by group moderators

Hmm. One wonders how representative their response was.

Glasgow Feminist Collective has grown increasingly concerned at what appears to be a coordinated campaign of media articles and programmes, and social media attacks concerning trans and non binary issues in the past 6-8 months. The public discourse on this has been full of vicious abuse, threats, and misinformation, and has heightened the sense of threat to mental health, physical safety and access to employment, entitlements and services, that trans and non-binary folk already experience in the UK. We are particularly concerned that the very existence of trans and non-binary people is deemed to be up for debate, that supporting trans and non-binary children is being called child abuse, and that those objecting to these non-scientific, ideologically or religiously based attacks are said to be threatening free speech. Adopting the most inclusive, supportive framework possible for trans and non-binary people into Scottish law would be a massive statement and would offer considerable push back in the current climate.

Just wow. Feminists that don't centre the female experience. Bit later on:

This Consultation response was developed by a sub-group of the Collective led by group moderators. We thank the Trans Alliance for their very thorough guidance on how they responded to the Consultation as that assisted us with preparing ours.

The problem with so many of these responses, is that they seem to have given no thought to the consequences of self ID. From the Quakers' response:

We see a parallel between the contentious objectors having to “prove” their deeply held beliefs, and trans people having to “prove” their gender identity.

We believe that when it comes to something that in essence can never be truly known or experienced by anyone other than that person, a certain amount of trust has to be given to individuals to know themselves.

Well, yes, fine, identify yourself any way you want. If we were talking about people being able to self-identify according to their 'gender identity', and that was kept totally separate from the category of sex, there would be no problem with this.

What they seem to have failed to understand is that this means that any man can self-identify as a woman, and demand access to all women's safe spaces as a result. Of course, an honest consultation would have spelt out that this is what was being proposed.

The Quakers' response, along with some other vaguely supportive responses, seem to be quite vague, with just yes, no, don't know ticked and not many comments. It indicates a lack of understanding of the issues.

Sorry wrong link! Here's the quakers:

www.gov.scot/Resource/0053/00539428.pdf

The other one I linked to was an Intersex association, which I was also surprised by as I often hear about the intersex community being against TRA stuff as appropriative. I don't understand the complexities though.

wonder how many of those who completed the forms had the authority to speak on behalf of the group /association /club as a whole

I wondered this too. At least a couple of the ones I looked at didn't sound as if they had been written by committee which you would expect ones representing an organisation to be.

I wonder how many of those who completed the forms had the authority to speak on behalf of the group /association /club as a whole? Or was it just Loud Mouth Larry/Loretta in the PR dept?

I'm particularly sad about the Quakers.

A good friend of mine is a Quaker and she is largely GC but does not have a settled opinion. I told her about the Quakers refusing Women's Place UK a venue earlier this year. She said that the Quaker community moves very slowly in deciding things, and cannot be expected to do something which could be seen as taking sides or risking violence, without first having extensive discussions and decision making time.

Yet, on seeing their response today, it turns out that they are in favour of self-id. Whatever extensive discussion went on in the lead up to taking this huge decision, my friend (who is an Elder, who reads all the literature and is very engaged with Quaker life) was not even aware of it, let alone involved.

www.gov.scot/Resource/0053/00539491.pdf

I see Brighton & Hove have also chipped in their comments. If I'd have known it was a free-for-all I'd have done it too. Damn.

I responded & I don’t live in Scotland because it was unclear whether Scots with a self-ID GRC would then have full recognition in the rest of the UK, effectively bringing self-ID across the border with zero consultation with the test of the UK population.

It's also somewhat astonishing is it not, that Brighton and Hove and the Bristol students managed to find out about this while some incredibly political literate women of my acquaintance actually in pigging Scotland were in the dark!

PS
I see Brighton & Hove have also chipped in their comments. If I'd have known it was a free-for-all I'd have done it too. Damn.

Forgive if this has been already mentioned, but why does the 'Feminist Society' of the Uni of Bristol get to comment? I had assumed this to be a Scottish issue and last time I was there, Bristol was in England still.

I put the quotes around the society's name as they are clearly TRA handmaidens. Also, point 8 of the consultation isn't even a question, so I don't know how they managed to answer it. I haven't looked at the rest, as I live in God's Own County - Yorkshire, in case you don't know - which is set to become the Devil's Own if Mermaids, West Yorks Police, Mesmac and all have their way.

I do not understand why it's sexual assault for Gayle Newland to have sex with her girlfriend while pretending to be a man, and not abusive for a woman to be forced to stay in a marriage with a man who is now a woman.

Yeah, maybe stick to prisoners of conscience in the Third World under threat of torture and death, Amnesty, which is why the majority of your supporters give you money, not for middle aged Scottish cross dressers and the rights of men to pay for sex.

Yes Wanderabout. The silencing is frightening and sinister.

I live in Scotland and wouldn't know about any of this if I hadn't seen it on MN. Why is it not all over the news? What can I do to help? Count me in for lobbying, Rose

PM me if anyone (I have sent one or two pms to some) wants to be involved in lobbying on this issue in the very near future.

the strongly-held narcissistis fantasy of their own ‘passing’

This, exactly. So few of them pass that there is no "outing" necessary.

I can't see that Action for Trans Health (of the bonkers free all trans prisoners immediately and let us prescribe our own medications and do surgery on each other manifesto) made a submission - unless they're actually called something else?

Thanks Alice

www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail/20180528/281487867021741

On named person and children's commissioner. Apologies, it was in the Daily Heil, but as it directly quotes the individual, I believe it is genuine.

Chatty, thanks for the charities stuff. Assessments of any review of safeguards definitely would be interesting.

On the outing business, it's nuts isn't it? One the one hand there's the craving for attention and admiration and on the other the concern for being outed. I'd understand (a bit) if we were talking about cross-dressers who were doing it very privately, but this is about people who are seeking a legal recognition of gender change and apparently willing to declare the intend to "live as that gender". Of course, we have seen that living as woman now includes keeping the bead, suit and tie and being called Bob, so maybe that's it!

Wonderabout, that tweet!😡😡😡

Spikypants did you see the thread on guidelines for schools on sex / gender? I think its really important you contact your son's school to register your concern.

Apologies I need to make a correction where I said:

I can always tell when trans people have written the consultation or their response to it because...

I omitted to add ‘activist’ - that should have read ‘trans activist type people’. Ie TRAs and their handmaidens.

A transsexual person would not make that claim. They don’t believe that clothes maketh the woman.

I will report my post and ask MNHQ for it to be amended for the avoidance of any doubt.