Shocking bullying of gender critical law professor (Rosa Freedman)

Well done Rosa you were brilliant with that submission. I'm blown away with your intelligence and clarity and watching the way you conduct yourself it's unbelievable that anyone could ever class you a 'hate figure'

The 2nd hour SNP discussion seem to centre around trans having to disclose their real biological sex on the census.

I think Joan McAlpine was already fairly GC but the awakening of so many other SMPs was a delight to watch. Great to hear some of their 'bigoted' and 'transphobic' questioning e.g. talking about 'ordinary women' or asking 'How do you live as a particular sex?'

I

Surely the whole point is to keep driving towards a society that doesn't give a shit about what you're wearing or what stereotypes you do/don't adhere to?

That's not the point, the point is the opposite to have a society so constricted into sterotypes your Gender changes based on clothes you ware.

I have never been able to understand why the fight is to preserve a society that would react negatively to someone being "outed" as being trans. Surely the whole point is to keep driving towards a society that doesn't give a shit about what you're wearing or what stereotypes you do/don't adhere to?

I can imagine! Reminds me of the time I did polling duty. There were two stations split alphabetically and an older (poss worse for wear) gent came to ours in error. When we told him he needed to vote across the corridor, he eyed us suspiciously and said "why? Are yous the Tories?"

Yes, R0wantrees, I can imagine there are a lot of people who are suspicious and think big brother is watching them!

It was an interesting experience!

Yes, R0wantrees, I can imagine there are a lot of people who are suspicious and think big brother is watching them! Surely allowing one group to opt out of the bits that upset them would cause other people to ask why they couldn't also. I foresee vast numbers of Scots deciding to be non binary if this goes through "just because".

It makes a nonsense of the whole thing if it's all about making respondents feel good.

The 2nd hour SNP discussion seem to centre around trans having to disclose their real biological sex on the census.
They fear this will 'out' them and violate their human rights.

Years ago I worked on delivering and collecting the census.
There have always been people who are reluctant to complete it because they believe it will be used against them.
The reasons for the census and way the data is used (not used) have always been made clear.

Yet again, the trans-lobby seem to be able to extract unique dispensations.

Adrian Harrop and Joss Prior are both on Twatter casting (unsubtle, self-satisfied) doubt on Rosa’s account

Did they muster up this scepticism about the stickers with razor blades urban myths?

Or ask a close chum of theirs for proof of alleged harassment?

If so, carry on being even-handedly sceptical, chaps - albeit without considering sources.

Transgender is a protected characteristic in law.
Yet they want more.

Change the law and the protected characteristic of being female will not be possible to enforce.

Ereshkigal
re: Female born NB's
more of a threat to women's spaces and facilities
Their actions, suggest they hate women even more than we realise.
They have zero empathy for women and girls.

The 2nd hour SNP discussion seem to centre around trans having to disclose their real biological sex on the census.
They fear this will 'out' them and violate their human rights.

I'd say, it is because they are living a lie.

I would so like to have seen a statement from the university that said that no employee should ever feel unsafe at their workplace such that hiding behind a tree/in the bushes could or should have happened and that they would put in place policies that would keep staff and students safe. I would also have welcomed a statement that such despicable things (urinnating on a door and calling a Jewish woman a nazi) would not be allowed to happen again. Ever. And that consequences exist.

appreciate NB is under the Stonewall trans umbrella but politically they are not really 'disruptive' in the way that people wanting to be accepted as the opposite are as they fit clearly into existing categories)

I disagree. I actually think they're more of a threat to women's spaces and facilities. Not the female NBs. There are plenty of male TRAs who identify as "NB" one being Jess Bradley.

Thanks for the youtube link Alice.
I listened to the full 2 hours.
Well worth worth watching.

Rosa was exceptionally clear on all aspects of the discussion. It was also good to hear Sue support Rosa, adding details where needed.
Tim Hopkins and Vic Valentine stood their ground with flimsy arguments.

Tim said legal sex and biological sex had differerent meanings.
It was the first time I have heard that,
as it is relevant to having a GRC.
It was pointed out by the others that this is where the law could be exploited.

Overall, a very good discussion.

ChloeHouston79 thank you so much
And to Rosa. I could weep with gratitude at your courage.

Ended up sitting up far too late watching this. Great concise comments and a proper exploration of the issues.

There was a substitute in the part I watched. Looks like it might have been Tim Hopkins instead of Hannah Pearson

Yes - Tim Hopkins' contributions makes several appearances in the thread that I linked above (mostly to disagree with him).

It did strike me that it was interesting that what they were essentially arguing about was how much access to woman's spaces/ rights/ services etc should transwomen have (and more existentially, what a transwoman IS) - and yet, no one in the room was a transwoman.

The NB was clearly committed, put their point across well and was sympathetic (though I felt disingenuous) but was (to me) clearly female in appearance (though androgynous in presentation)

It did seem odd for the argument not to presented by the intended beneficiary rather than a proxy ..

(appreciate NB is under the Stonewall trans umbrella but politically they are not really 'disruptive' in the way that people wanting to be accepted as the opposite are as they fit clearly into existing categories)

Thanks Groundcontrol and Arran

There was a substitute in the part I watched. Looks like it might have been Tim Hopkins instead of Hannah Pearson from Equality Network (Tim listed a Director whilst Hannah is a Policy Officer)

The witnesses are as follows:
'1. Census (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill: The Committee will take evidence on the Bill at Stage 1 from—
Rosa Freedman, Professor of Law Conflict and Global Development, Reading University;
Susan Smith, For Women Scotland;
and then from—
Vic Valentine, Scottish Trans Policy Officer, Scottish Trans Alliance;
Hannah Pearson, Policy Coordinator, Equality Network.'

a rep from a Scottish Women's got (does anyone know who?)

Susan Smith from ForWomen.Scot

Interesting thread:

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1070987804111458304.html

Very - a couple of the panel definitely were (or inscrutable anyway which amounts to the same thing given the context)