For Women Scotland lose case

I am gutted about this case, but am so excited to have seen this in my neighbourhood today.

Just thought I'd post here incase your are here. Made my day.

Sorry, that's about the extent of my knowledge on moderators - I presume it depends who is on duty at the time ...

Wow, 20k raised so fast. Off to dig.

Callixte
I've found that the best way to find out why a post was deleted is to report the deleted post and ask. I've always had a reply when I've done this, and usually fairly quickly (within an hour or two). The response can be a bit slower at night or at the weekend.

When you say I should "tag a moderator" - is there a specific person I can tag who may be responsible for this board and who might react in a timely fashion?

You can report your comment and ask them, too, I think? I've emailed before and always had polite responses.

As for your qu's -

Surgery hasn't been a requirement, I don't think, ever. The criteria is having a GRC.

The situation you're describing is 'self ID'. This is what the GRA reform debates in both England and Scotland were discussing. (Are probably still discussing).

The Scottish govt kicked it into the long grass til post election, recognising presumably that it wasn't exactly a vote winner.

The trouble is that many situations already have effective self ID. There is a transwoman running a Rape Crisis centre in Scotland, for example. I don't know the exact situation with refuges, I suspect it varies, but I do know that Monkland's Women's Aid just recently lost their council funding in favour of a company that would provide a 'gender neutral' service.

@ArabellaScott I’ve tried that before and still been ignored! But I’m neither being banned nor muted so I suppose I really can’t complain. I’ll just need to find better sounding words and rephrase

If TWAW in Scotland, does this mean they will struggle as much as biological women in Scotland to access health care and be taken seriously by medical professionals? If TWAW in Scotland, do they need to undergo top and bottom surgery before they are women, or is it now a come as you are, if you tell us you’re a woman we’ll believe you even if you’re presenting as male (both in appearance, with lack of hormone and surgical treatment etc etc).

I.E can my biologically male partner, who presents as a biological male, now gain access to a woman’s refuge simply by saying he’s female?

@Callixte they’ll not get back to you. I’m frequently deleted on trans discussions with no communication on it, though I’m beginning to wonder if that’s MNHQ’s way of not directly objecting to my comment but still having to be seen as supportive of those that report comments for fear of receiving the kind of hate and bile that so many others have received for not complying with certain demands.

Or perhaps we both need to articulate our views in such a way that circumnavigates certain individuals notice in order to make our point. But I’m absolutely shite at being articulate.

Callixte and CatsHair, I think you'll need to either tag an admin/moderator individually or post in Site Stuff - I don't think the MNHQ tag does anything. I could be wrong!

@MNHQ why was my post asking if trans women would be treated the same as biological women with regards to being dismissed when it comes to medical care deleted?

Have slung some bulbs in the flowerbed. Hoping some lovely tulips bloom.

Bumping. This is dire.Can folk please tweet the link to FWSs you -know -what if you are on twitter. Or post on fb if you are brave! Thanks

The situation in Scotland gets more frightening by the day. writing on the wall IN CHALK gets the police round.

wingsoverscotland.com/chalk-and-cheese/

Thanks for the reminder vivaria its a good day for gardening. Just popped along to turn the beds over a bit.

Thank you FWS for all the work you do

I've had a look at their site, there is a shortfall in the number of digs so I did a bit of trowelling.

I can't imagine how much energy it must take them to keep this going. Thank you, FWS, if you are reading, just thank you for what you are doing.

Unless since there is according to the judge no relevant discernable difference between women and transwomen in law, women also are covered by all the trans legislation as well as the sex legislation?

Thanks for the share token @Igneococcus. I too am very, very angry. I think the SG is using "trans rights" aka shitting on women to signal their perceived moral superiority over England to those who don't follow this closely. It's part of something bigger which makes it harder to fight.

You either have to qualify as being either male sex or female sex. You can’t simply be covered on the grounds of having a sex.

It is wholly unclear what that meant, because obviously in legislation to assist women, sex does not apply for male people.

Well, the EA2010 is formally symmetrical, in that you can't discriminate against people directly or indirectly for being male or female.

But in practice it's females who rely on that more, eg indirect discrimination for lack of support for childbirth-related issues. And the permitted sex-based exemptions are also mainly relied on by females.

They have a protected characteristic. If they are mistakenly perceived as women they can claim sex discrimination. If like the vast majority they don't pass, they may be experiencing discrimination due to their gender reassignment characteristic.

Yep, and I think this is proper and fair.

Why the fuck are we having to take our own government to court to uphold the Equality Act?

What would that look like in the case that a transgender person had been discriminated against twice because of both their sex and their gender reassignment? The closest I can get is if it was the case of a trans man- the initial discrimination was that they were discriminated against because they were trans, and then the second discrimination wasthat they were pregnant, maybe? And doesn’t that illustrate that yet again, we’re looking in the wrong direction for where the unfairness occurs, because we’re looking at males, when it’s potentially females who suffer.

Yes, that is a potentially plausible - if unlikely - situation, although I think this JR any instances would have been regarding transwomen - I don't believe transmen are mentioned or included at all?