Humza Yousaf and Scottish Hate Crime Bill

I have absolutely no idea what was wrong with your post

Why on earth was my post deleted? I was talking about the nature of totalitarian thinking, and of cults. and about Anthony Bourdain's cookery/travel programme. And about how foolish some MPs are going to feel down the line.

The moderation on this site, apart from being report driven, is variable in action according to who is on duty. It feels as if those amendments in the act are in action here - now.

@justhadathought I completely agree about Russia. I have family ties to the country and the dogmatic strive for tolerance here feels very uncomfortable to me indeed.

Also Bourdain’s travelogues are amazing. I’ve watched all of them on Netflix during the first lockdown and really enjoyed them.

So just to make absolutely sure I understand, there’s a way of distinguishing whether clothes are male or female (so we can identify cross dressers) but all sex organs are now gender neutral? So you can’t tell if a penis is male or female by looking at it, but there’s a very clear distinction between a skirt and a kilt. Got it. Logical.

Well exactly. And I'm sure Police Scotland will receive excellent training in how to make the distinction.

Why does this warrant hate speech legislation and women don't??

Link broken- this one: icd.who.int/browse10/2016/en#/F69

Link to ICD10, as I could get zapped for posting an image of what is stated in ICD10 F65.1

www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/bluebook.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiVp5-Nns7uAhVRXMAKHR2lBHsQFjACegQIBRAM&usg=AOvVaw13DS0KM0_xxirAbH9KPdsC

They'll probably argue that ICD 10 is out of date and pretend that ICD10 F65.1 doesn't exist

Although, I wonder if we should be thankful for this dreadful bill? Up until now GC feminists have been pointing out that the trans umbrella is so wide it includes cross dressers with paraphilias. No the gender ideologues said, don't be so bigoted, it is only about gender identity, you're being hysterical. Well now, here we have the Scottish government in black and white trying to legislate to protect the very men GC feminists have been warning about.

The whole thing is a mess but the cross dressing element is dreadful. It is either utterly frivolous (the cast of Rocky horror or men on a stag night) or for men with paraphilias (why on earth are they covered under hate speech?). Having had experience of men with this paraphilia they absolutely don't need protection and instead are more often likely to be protagonists (usually against women).

The energy going into this at the expense of targeting much more common hate crime is beyond belief.

But having watched yousaf. It’s all about cross dressing men

What about cross dressing women ?

And here's a link to their full statement:

forwomen.scot/02/02/2021/fws-statement-on-justice-committee-meeting-today/

Update from For Women Scot:

"Many thanks to everyone who took the time to email the Justice Committee MSPs about the amendments on the Hate Crime Bill. Unfortunately, all the amendments relating to free speech were withdrawn at the last minute, and the Committee now plan on presenting a new collaborative amendment to be debated at Stage 3 of the Bill. We will wait to see if this will provide women with the protections we need.
It is very frustrating and I think the Convener Adam Tompkins reflected the thoughts of many of us in his alarm and distress at the reaction over the last few days to what he thought were thoughtful amendments, but which some classed as 'transphobic charters'.
Johann Lamont spoke to her amendment to add 'sex' to Part 1 of the Bill. Although it was a cracking speech the members of the Committee seemed set on opting for waiting for the outcome of the working group on misogyny. In the end, Johann withdrew her amendment before it could be voted on, which means she can resubmit it at Stage 3 for the wider debate and vote of all MSPs in the Chamber.
There was also some discussion about why cross dressers are protected under the Hate Crime Bill, yet women are not.
Have a look at the hashtag #HimNotHer on Twitter for our follow-up thoughts on this!"

This whole episode is a terrifying demonstration of how little women's safety matters and how determined opponents of women's rights are to silence us.

Is there still wording regarding cross dressing men? I am absolutely aghast if there is. The gall to include protections for men with paraphilias is nuts in the first place. But to do so at the expense of women. Words fail me.

If the Scottish hate crime bill gets passed, women will no longer be able to say that a penis isn't a female sex organ. Fucking absurd

Sorry OP, didn't intend to derail.

Anything that those of us watching in horror from England or Wales can do to help?

"outdated ideas of biology"

Looooooool where's the Nobel prize for this outstanding new discovery then?

[ArabellaScott:]"Do they have to prove intent? I thought the 'hate incident' was entirely dependent on the perception of the person reporting it - no need to be sure that the person has any intent or even is one of the special protected characteristics."

It seems that they will need to prove intent. I'm still not a fan of the legislation. It encourages the police to harass people for social media posts, and they may try their luck in courts and perhaps be successful.

But it's very difficult (in theory) to prove "intent to stir up hatred" if you are just saying things like, "men aren't women". You simply deny that this was intended to stir up hate for anyone, and say that it was rather criticism of an ideology, and we should have sympathy for people suffering from gender dysphoria, but that doesn't mean you have to accept everything they say about themselves.

The prosecution then has a burden of proof that they can't really meet as "intentions" are kind of an invisible quality to a degree.

Now I could be wrong, and maybe they convict a load of people. Society is certainly going in a dystopian direction when it comes to free speech.

Quoting something from back in September of last year:

www.heraldscotland.com/news/18742331.snp-announce-hate-crime-bill-climbdown-free-speech-row/

"He said ministers will amend the Hate Crime Bill to mean a conviction for new offences of "stirring up" hatred would only be possible where it was shown that someone intended to stir up hatred through their actions or behaviour.

The draft legislation currently has a lower threshold covering behaviour "likely to" stir up hatred, whether this was done intentionally or not."

Could this bill be challenged as a breach of human rights: freedom of expression, right to a private life and discrimination?

I agree it's particularly hard to take in those circumstances Whatsnew. And almost impossible to comprehend.

It's happening across all parties though.

The Welsh Government's Women & Equalities Minister Jane Hutt helped set up Women's Aid in Wales. Immediately after the UK Gov's GRA statement she put out a statement on behalf of the cabinet:
"We believe trans women are women, trans men are men and non-binary identities are valid. We restate our support for trans people’s right to self-identification."

Women's concerns are routinely ignored in favour of male demands.

Their former leader Leanne Wood is an ex Women's Aid worker & social worker

Is it just me who finds it even worse that a woman who has works in these fields can push the idea that sex is irrelevant?

"outdated ideas of biology"
Can she show me the evidence that we, as a species have suddenly evolved the ability to change sex.
Gender may be "complex and deeply personal" but it's not sex or biology.

Labour Iain Murray