AskHumza

Yeah sex was going to be added to the stupid bill but then but then but then but then

Well why bother

Yeah women are not protected under hate crime. As it’s too complex

But cross dressers are but not sure if that’s a woman in trousers

He also said that if a woman was perceived as being trans gender and a hate crime was committed against her then that was a hate crime

If she was just a woman then not a hate crime

Totally clear ?🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️

This article is quite useful to understand the context - www.scotsman.com/news/politics/humza-yousaf-accused-of-ignoring-concerns-over-protections-for-free-speech-in-hate-crime-bill-3151019

Essentially, when the Hate Crime Bill was being discussed, various amendments had been suggested (such as adding sex as a category to be protected) which were then removed from discussion, most likely as a reaction to lobbying from particular groups. As Justice Minister, Humza Yousaf played a big part in that.

www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/politics/6803680/hate-crime-bill-scotland-free-speech/

@Sexnotgender Who is Humza? I just tried to google him and it looks like there’s a Humza Yousaf who is an SNP candidate (his Twitter page) and also Scottish justice secretary? If he’s the person in question, what has he done? Can you please provide more context? I’m trying to now find out more about the Hate Crime bill that some posters have alluded to.

As a slight derail, I completely agree with NiceGerbil. The reaction to the BlackMumsnet proposal was awful.

@DeepThinkingGirl GC feminists are fighting against a change that would affect Muslim women negatively by potentially taking away their right to single sex gatherings. That is the context.

Sorry you feel bashed in MN in general. I hate to think of people being excluded.

#askhumza

How many sexes are there

He is our justice minister

He refused to answer that question

Imagine not knowing the answer to that question

WhoNeeds I don't think you did miss out a word because everything is pretty shite for women. We are at the bottom of the heap every single time. The Scottish Hate Crime Bill perfectly encapsulates this. Everyone and their rubber duck is worth protecting except women.

@Igneococcus I'm also in Scotland and agree. The Scottish Government have stated that their official policy is TWAW (and been corrected by a judge in the recent FWS ruling as it is not official policy - it hasn't been discussed or assessed). In that case, how can there be any exceptions at all? (religious, peerage or otherwise). Could it be because when a situation benefits men, the rules don't apply?

Omg I can't write to make any sense
Males, regardless of how they identify, fare better in religion and in this Scottish law

Religions
Sorry, missed out a word. Most religions are pretty shite for women imo

I think most (all?) are pretty shite for women
The point afaics is that men get the better deal. I can imagine he would support a TW to be in any, religious or otherwise, female space but if a woman identified as a male would she be allowed into the male space or gain any preferential treatment?
I suspect his answer would be no but he would just not answer. He is a hypocrite

No idea who/what Humza is, but if you've got a penis you'll be sitting with the men in the mosque.

Seems a bit like a loaded question... with the intention of a gotcha..

I'm in Scotland. Humza introduced a law that could see me jailed for seven years if someone thinks me discussing anything gendercritical even in the privacy of my own home was meant to stir up hatred, even stating a clear biological fact (I'm a biologist) could see me accused. This law, which is basically a blasphemy law, protects religion, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question to ask (to the person who wrote it) what would happen when the protect characteristic religion clashes with the protected characteristic trans.

Agree there's a lot of posts that look like shit stirring and aiming to cause division and maybe get nice screen shots.

Problem is, more often than not it seems to work :/

Ah ok yes that makes perfect sense.

I had also missed the question the OP asked.

I’m Muslim and I’ve seen Islam and Muslims randomly dragged into conversations including on this board.. and frankly fed up with it.

Like I said I don’t know the story and what he stands for.. but Op was asking for opinions of Muslims. I’m one, and in the grand scheme of things, I really find this question annoying.

Because the predominant narrative on this board is quite undermining to us generally.

Feminism board hasn’t been great at all in being inclusive to Muslims and yes I do at times find it islamophobic. So it almost feels like we are being used to someone else’s agenda that doesn’t speak to us.

I do benefit a lot from this board. But yeh, I’d like to keep religion out of it as I don’t think it’s very respected on here.

HTH.

I'm interested then in why you decided to post a pretty strong post (implying islamophobia) when you didn't know what the context was.

I'm honestly interested because it's not something I would do, but lots of people do seem to. What was it that you read/ thought that made you think right ho racists I'll tell them off, iyswim.

Sorry that's probably not well worded!

Ok sorry in honest truth I don’t know Humza and what he stands for in terms of this topic

If he was already leading the scenes on this debate then yeh ok he should be challenged

'so the specific curiousity directed at Muslims speaks volumes.'

This sort of thing.

You can't ask that.
It's islamophobic to ask that.
Implication: you're racist
Result aimed for: conversation etc stopped. Also. Lovely glow of having fronted up to bad people and named them as (insert thing it's bad to be)

Engagement with actual conversation. Nil.

Expand. Why is it racist/ islamophobic to ask the architect of a highly contraversial law if he would walk the walk in real life, when it came to a sex based norm in his personal religious life.

If he wouldn't he's a massive hypocrite, no?

If he would... It would be interesting to find out what his plans are to address any discrimination.

He doesn't answer. He can't, can he.

The fact he said that having a GRC would NOT mean the automatic first place for a person going to prison would be the one indicated by the GRC... kind of shows he's pushed all this through and he doesn't even understand some basic stuff that is already in place.

He deserves to be challenged.

If it's not fair to bring someone's religious background into anything then it's bigoted for women to be concerned about eg JRM who says as a Catholic he's absolutely against abortion under any circumstances. Asking him what he would do if it was an early pregnancy and his wife would die otherwise is according to your logic, bigoted.

Nope sorry.

Convince me.

Because he's a Muslim. It's asking him whether he would walk the walk in his own life, in his own religion.

Is that a serious question?

Did you think Islam was asked about at random?!!

Seems a bit like a loaded question... with the intention of a gotcha..

Why Muslims? Is it just easy to kick them while their down? Because they’re so exposed to public scrutiny so it’s ok to do a social experiment?

Muslims are targeted as a minority group. These questions aren’t specific to Muslims, so the specific curiousity directed at Muslims speaks volumes.

I think it's because it's seen as bad to make it personal.

What so many miss is that to women, this is all personal. It's not theoretical. When a woman says I'm worried it's not a vague concern from a distance. It's up close and personal.

Just occurred to me... Do lots of men not get that? And the answer is obvious, no they don't.

Sex changes aren't particularly uncommon in some Muslim countries, I'd not assume it's a gotcha question. Nor would I assume that he'd approve of the answer if they would differentiate.

But if you ask about actual people in actual situations that will actually impact them negatively, those things don't matter.