Scottish census decision

I've just dug for the appeal. Seems really important!

Found some carrots in the garden and threw them in the pot.

Dug

Dug.

Crikey, the appeal is on Wednesday. We won't have long to wait.

Well done to FPFW.

The garden is filling up nicely.

Retweet under the #Womenwontwheesht if you can.

FPFW have leave to appeal!
Dig for victory

"Fair Play For Women has been granted permission for an urgent appeal of the first instance judgment on the
@scotgov
guidance accompanying the sex question in the Scottish Census.

The appeal will be heard at the Scottish court of Session on WEDNESDAY 23 FEBRUARY"

mobile.twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1495025839607537665

because no stupid fucker had ever previously actually done it

Until now nobody had ever questioned it so the law, words, haven't been tightly defined enough to rebuff these stupid challenges. We have all always known thatthere are 2 sexes and that human beings cannot change sex. That sex changes is a fiction and referes only to cosmetic and social changes (well, social ones at a very hard push).

So maybe judges are choosing to find in favour of them, shock everyone and get the laws rewritten, the rules tightened up.

But I might just be being to kind, naive...

I'm not sure I'd know how to answer this census if I was trans! Say I was a trans woman and wanted to be recorded as such, should I record my sex as male and gender as trans, or sex as female and gender as trans?

It sounds like I could choose to do either, but then no-one knows what any of the data means!

It is interesting that losing the first round and winning on appeal is becoming something of a pattern for women.

Perhaps it's harder to "educate" judges higher up the judicial hierarchy. Also on average they are probably older and more conservative and less worried about being called a TERF.

Some of these lower court judgements are so woolly and vague. It's as if Stonewall has had a hand in writing them up.

It is interesting that losing the first round and winning on appeal is becoming something of a pattern for women.

On the plus side FWS have just won their appeal. I wonder if that will assist when this is appealed?

Major note here for lawmakers:

Law is going to have to be much more carefully and explicitly worded and definitions wholly pinned down. Because we live in an age of wankers who will exploit every single wobbly spot in their 'queer and smash up everything' mission.

How can a court not have seen it essential to define the terms properly?

The conclusion here might be extended to all sorts of euphemisms:
for example, because dying might be called ‘passing’,as a euphemism, ‘passing’ means dying…..,.

If people don't think it's entirely deliberate, surely that's got to do it.

too soon

Posted to soon

This is why it is absolutely vital that we push for accurate language in legislation, regulations etc. Gender should never be used as an alternative for sex they are two different things.

Datun
One of the reasons he couldn't define sex because sex and gender have been used interchangeably.

The Judge quoted the Supreme Court
"In Elan-Cane, the Court had referred (at paragraph 5) to the fact that,
subject to the inclusion of transgender persons within the category of their acquired gender,
public agencies tended to use the terms “gender” and “sex” interchangeably to refer to the biological categories of male and female, and had made the same point in more general
terms at paragraph 52"
and
"Ultimately, at least for now, the recent observations in paragraphs 5 and 52 of the Supreme
Court judgment in Elan-Cane, that the terms “gender” and “sex” have been used essentially
interchangeably in various forms of legal and non-legal discourse, hold good."

That is the point I picked up on. The use of sex and gender interchangeably means that the Judge is able to argue that the word sex encompasses both biological sex and gender identity because both sex and gender have been used to describe biological sex so he is arguing the reverse must also be true if they are synonyms then it works both ways.

He said sex and he meant sex. He just said he couldn't define it.

He said: “I would accept the suggestion that biological sex, sex recognised by law, or self-identified (or “lived”) sex as at the date of the census are all capable of being comprehended within the word [sex].”

Sex is anything you want it to be. Therefore it's nothing. It's absolutely meaningless.

For gods sake. I despair sometimes.

How can they write things like "if you are non-binary" as though it is any more than an identification like goth, punk or mod or rocker?

How, how on earth have we come to this point where serious organisations like the census (and others) validate this?

Do they actually believe that someone who says they are 'non-binary' is truly neither male or female, or both male and female.

Please, please can the grown ups come back.

Well, I hope FPFW get the appeal. I'll be supporting them all the way.

Even though I think the judge is fundamentally wrong I do think the problem is wider than a rogue judge. Parliament has been sloppy in its drafting and sex and gender have been used interchangeably at times e.g. you are looking for sex discrimination in pay by assessing the gender pay gap.

I think there has to be a real push to ensure that all legislation refers to the protected characteristic of sex (not gender) and that sex means biological sex.

I think the whole of Scotland should make this census a shit show.
Dont fight it, fill it in as you feel like, have the mouse fill out the form that only a mouse lives there, or add in so many people that your house would burst at the seams, make the population of Scotland 3 times bigger than it actually is, if theres a way, get more forms and make up some addresses, make ages random, say your children claim their pension, grandad does a full time job at 96 years old. Go bloody wild with it.