No self ID in Scotland!

This is awesome. It'll be a cold day in hell before I ever vote SNP but Joan McAlpine is amazing and wry string in standing up to the party line.

Mhairi Black is a disgrace and I tweeted her to say so.

Hopefully the trans bubble will burst before Scotland get around to actually passing the reform bill.

Assuming it will burst! This seems like a stupid fad in so many ways, but it's also so much more than a stupid fad. Nobody ever passed legislation about legwarmers.

So I go back and forth between "the bubble will burst soon" and "downhill to dystopia."

I dearly wish that the poster who referred to all SNP supporters as rabid and declared we were blind to faults and failing every other woman with our crap parliament and just dreadful (without mentioning Boris et al) sees this.

I've never, ever been prouder to be a Scottish woman.

This position has already tacitly been acknowledged by the Scots gov when they realised they couldn't remove sex categories from the census nor keep school guidance that excluded some girls from girls only spaces when children with trans identity used them.

There was always have to be compromise.

This is a stance that has to be fought down. The GRA 2004 was the compromise for women. It's proved that any infringement of sex categories or sex based rights of women ends in a battle over how much of them can be commandeered for men. Any compromise is merely giving some of women's rights away to men instead of all, and it will merely be the starting point for the TRA political lobby to target the next slice, and the next, because their compromise is accepting some of what they want instead of all, and the precedent is now there that women's rights are something that can be removed and given to men under enough pressure.

The answer for women has to be no. Women's rights cannot be compromised on, they won't accept just some of their rights (for the moment) being appropriated for men, sex based rights has to mean a hard line. The GRA was a compromise for women and it failed. There has to be a different solution found. It's looking increasingly like the common sense version most people go to is sex being a fixed, unchanged fact; gender being fully respected as whatever people want it to be and sex and gender are recorded separately; third spaces and resources are provided for people who wish to be treated in their chosen gender but cannot access the single sex provisions which in some cases must be protected for the need and equality of biological females.

In essence: TW are TW, an identity to be celebrated and valued, but TW are not biological women and the two groups at times have different needs, and equality means different treatment.

I saw a tweet calling Joan McAlpine; Saint Joan of Scotland. From now on, that is what I shall call her.

The framing of the article is really surprising (in a good way) even down to referring to them as 'trans lobbyists' and the emphasis on how much money these groups are paid.
Like others have said its not over yet though. The article misses some v important parts of the government's plans.

There was always have to be compromise. I’m under no illusion that things will stay the way they are. But at least they didn’t jump into it with two feet.

The government has to define what is meant by 'living as a man/woman' in order to see if the lifestyle of a person who claims to be living as the opposite sex conforms to those expectations.

And this is (I hope) going to be the weak point. When replying to the consultation it will be important to point out the impossibility of defining "living as a wo/man". I have a sliver of hope that the whole thing will fall over on that point.

Does it mean we can challenge a male in women's spaces and not get a call from police?

Yes. This has always been the case. The Equality Act 2010, Schedule 3, section 27, subsection 6 has always permitted this:

(6) The condition is that—

(a) the service is provided for, or is likely to be used by, two or more persons at the same time, and

(b) the circumstances are such that a person of one sex might reasonably object to the presence of a person of the opposite sex.

See Schedule 3 and scroll down to section 27 [Single sex services]

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3

[see also sections 26 [Separate services for the sexes] and 28 Gender reassignment]]

In addition, here are the Explanatory Notes relating to Single sex provision [sections 26, 27 and 28]

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7

Further, the Equality Act is civil law, not criminal law, so the police do not engage in any way since no crime is involved here.

Does it mean we can challenge a male in womens spaces,and not get a call from police?

I'm in England, inot Scotland, but I have promised myself that if I ever encounter a male invading the ladies I will challenge him if I don't feel in physical danger. I am old enough to not give a shit, plus I have the old dear factor. The police are inclined to favour well spoken elderly women. We are, I've read, the most law abiding demographic by a long road.

Is this real?Does it mean we can challenge a male in womens spaces,and not get a call from police?

It’s already being painted as a gross ‘betrayal’ of the transgender community by the likes of Mahiri Black (SNP) and Patrick Harvie (Greens) who seem to object to the equality impact assessments (outrageous?!) and just want to press ahead regardless.

What's the reasoning behind their objection to the equality impact assessments? Don't they understand that they're supposed to protect all protected groups?

Mhairi Black tweeted this. She doesn't seem to understand how these laws work.
twitter.com/MhairiBlack/status/1141795447578734592

I doubt if the penalties for false representation will ever be applied.

How could they be? The declaration will be based on a feeling that they have when they make the declaration. There is no proof that they really have that feeling. If they subsequently are found to not be living in the way that might be expected for someone who has that feeling, they can still claim that they had the feeling at the time they made the declaration.

The government has to define what is meant by 'living as a man/woman' in order to see if the lifestyle of a person who claims to be living as the opposite sex conforms to those expectations.

When asked directly they said they'd do their best to push this next phase of consultation (and the next version of the bill) through before the end of this parliament but also said something about that being a restrictively tight timescale. You got the impression they didn't honestly think it would be achievable.

As mentioned above I think it'll come down to bargaining chips after that for support of the Greens. It may be that other more pressing issues take precedence for them by that point but I'd be surprised if that's the case. They're heavy duty on this issue.

I think the key objectives have to be pushing for full and transparent consultation, for as long as this remains "on the shelf". The wording of the proposals, the type of consultation they'll do, ensuring they have women's groups giving evidence and on all supporting panels. Getting the definitions sorted out - making sure sex and gender aren't deliberately conflated (as they were before) and making sure there's a working definition of trans itself. Plenty work to do, it's far from over.

The biggest problem is that this is being shelved until after the election as they know they will lose more votes id they go ahead. My worry is, as a prior snp voter, that they will need green support after next election and will allow self id and loss of woman's rights. I no longer trust the snp to put what is right before being power hungry ☹️ however with people like Joan we have a chance to stop the rot or at least reduce the impact.

Didactylos yeh they were asked how you live as a particular sex. No real answer. How would 'Pippa' Bunce answer the question, um...not sure maybe non-binary. They wanted to remove the exclusion clause the TRAs keep hanging onto to get the reforms through. All apart for out of touch intersex obsessed Ross Greer sounded like they get it.

I know what you mean Gingerkitty, theyve not abandoned the plans yet but I still hope there is all to play for.

Will a bill with proposals of less gatekeeping get through an open debate, with all voices heard, on a background of increasing concerns about fasttracking transition and lack of mental health support?

Will the concept of gender identity/Yogakartha principles being best practice finally be fully examined?

or possibly there might be linked some legally enforcable definitions, boundaries and protections for women and girls?

or will the sheer nonsensical nature of 'living as a woman/man' finally get recognised as the tosh it is, and the gender recognition certificate have a different form or meaning from the current legal fiction and simply 'we recognise how you want to live your life and will protect and uphold that but your sex remains immutable and cannot change in legality or reality.

Except they have not abandoned the plans at all. The proposals are still for self ID after living in chosen gender for 3 months, with a 3 month cooling off period. No reports from gender specialists needed.

It is self ID!

I am filled with hope by the fact that 'no debate' is ended, and scrutiny, questions and impact assessments will be carried out.
I was impressed watching the forensic dissection of the subject by the committee considering the Census changes regarding trans and non binary identities in December when a few heads went above the parapet, and Susan Smith and Rosa Freedman gave evidence.
www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/culture-tourism-europe-and-external-affairs-committee-december-6-2018

What really struck me in this committee was watching Vic Valentine and Tim Hopkins submissions wibbling and backtracking when forced to confront some reality based questions (Joan MacAlpine, Kenneth Gibson, Annabelle Ewing, Alexander Stewart, Stuart McMillan, Tavish Scott), instead of the usual fawning, most-oppressedest-evah, oh noes how can we validate your identity. They clearly had no practical substance to their arguments beyond 'we want this' and 'complicated word salad' but no real answers when their past words and in many cases erroneous statements were questioned, (including trying to sneak the Scottish Public Boards gender representation bills redefinition of the term woman as a precedent for self defined gender identity being used over sex)
Heres hoping lovely sunlight and rational argument will be enough to find a way of protecting the sex based rights of women and girls while providing support for those with trans identities. The discussions now are also coming onto a new background of public awareness, questions being asked about diagnosis, mermaids, safeguarding, NSPCC, Pride parade issues etc, Martinas documentary with the evidenced unfairness rather than a heartrending Butterflies drama, and the grassroots voices of Scottish women are now being heard.

Thank FUCK!!!

😅- relief

*I will outline some key provisions that will be in the draft bill for consultation. Existing requirements in the 2004 act to provide medical evidence will be removed, but it is important to stress that the current requirements will be replaced by an alternative statutory process. The term “self-identification” is routinely used, but in my view it does not adequately reflect either the seriousness or the permanency of the process that is envisaged. Applicants will, as they are now, be required to make a solemn statutory declaration that they intend to live permanently in their acquired gender.

In addition, applicants will be required to state in that statutory declaration that they have already been living in their acquired gender. Currently, applicants for gender recognition certificates are required to have been living in their acquired gender for a minimum of two years. It is the Scottish Government’s opinion that that period should be reduced. Our initial proposal is for a three-month period, but that, too, will be fully consulted on.

The draft bill will propose that, after an application for gender recognition has been made and has been checked to ensure that the necessary information and statutory declaration have been provided, there will be a mandatory three-month reflection period before a gender recognition certificate can be granted. At the end of that period, the applicant will need to confirm that they still wish to proceed. Therefore, applicants will need to have lived in their acquired gender for at least six months before a gender recognition certificate can be granted. Making a false statutory declaration is, and will remain, a criminal offence, the potential punishment for which includes up to two years’ imprisonment.

Retaining the requirement for a statutory declaration, making it clear that a false declaration is a criminal offence and building in time for reflection will enshrine in law the seriousness of the process. No one should doubt that it is a significant undertaking, or that it will require the same level of commitment from the individual as the existing system does.*

From Shirley Anne Somerville speech

So a total of 6 months living in new gender, no psychiatric or report from gender specialist needed. I doubt if the penalties for false representation will ever be applied.

This is fantastic. We need more politicians like Jo.

Joan McAlpine and allies, we salute you from Wales and hope that we can insist on something similar here. Thank you for showing the way and showing other legislatures that they don't have to go along with disastrous and anti-women decisions in order to look trendy and woke.