Observer Article today

Emphatic. Read this from a FPFW social media link earlier today. Gobsmacked, in a good way😀

For anyone emailing in response you have to give an address and phone number…

If you haven’t signed this yet

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/623243

Brilliant. I can't be outside Holyrood on Wednesday but I'm going to fire off some last ditch emails quoting excerpts of this article to the MSPs I've contacted previously. All those Labour and Tory ones who parrotted how they would table amendments to ensure the sex exemptions could be maintained - yeah right...

Jack McConnell, former First Minister, has also asked for the Bill to be paused

C'mon!!!

Letter #2 sent…failed to see there was a limit of 250 words though, oh dear!

Private companies are prohibited from discriminating in the provision of services, just as public bodies are. That’s why, for example, the people who ran the B&B who wouldn’t let a gay couple share a bed were held to have unlawfully discriminated.

My understanding was that Beira's Place had been carefully set up as a private company in order to be able to refer tw to services that would appropriately meet their needs while still allowing women who want single-sex spaces to have them.

I was just about to say, the article is a bit misleading in that it implies single sex services and spaces cannot exclude a trans person with a GRC. The Equality Act expressly provides that single sex services are not discriminatory on grounds of gender reassignment, provided it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. That is the case whether you are talking about excluding a trans person with a GRC or without one.

Exemptions for organisation like this are clearly laid out.

That was unexpected! Great news.

Thank god for the Observer. Excellent piece. Well summed up:

But in Scotland and Westminster, self-described progressive politicians have proved too gutless to advocate balance and compromise. It is marginalised women – in prison, in domestic abuse services, and who require intimate care as a result of disability – who will bear the consequences of their cowardice.

She probably wrote it - she does write leader articles for the Observer as well as her own column.

And comments are invited! Is that a first? In the form of emails, not BTL, I wrote something but managed to selet3 before sending. Oh well ( picks up virtual pen again)

Great article and I know it's the Observer, not The Guardian, but where has this sane, sensible level of debate been for the last few years? Infuriating!

That's an excellent editorial, explains what is being proposed and what it means for women really clearly.

Of course what they're proposing isn't really a compromise, because there isn't a compromise position between 'some men are women' and 'no men are women' - its binary.

It's a bit frustrating that it talks about a compromise. As if no one had talked about compromise before. No debate is why we've never been allowed to talk about how self ID affects us.

Yes, it's a great leader column. No surprise that it is in The Observer and not The Guardian. My only criticism is that this should have been published long ago and not the weekend before the seemingly inevitable passing of this dreadful piece of legislation.

Whereareyourshoes

A clear distinction between gender identity and biological sex in law would balance the legitimate rights of trans people and those of women, protecting both groups against discrimination but establishing beyond doubt that it is lawful to provide female-only services for women as a matter of privacy, dignity and safety.

That would be the reasonable and sensible thing to do. Unfortunately, Nicola Sturgeon needs the Greens onside and they're barking zealots, who insist "TWAW, no debate." It's a big driver of her determination to ram it through, despite the opposition of a majority of the population.

Fab 👍👍

Gutless - too damn right. That's exactly what lots of politicians have been to date.

that's a cracker

thanks for linking

Ah yes. The deafening silence. It’s great to discover women with whom you can share your concerns, though.

“A Scottish male sex offender who identifies as a woman sexually assaulted a ten-year-old girl and has been placed in a women’s prison…”

The ten-year-old girl - she’s just collateral damage? And the female prisoners too - collateral damage? Just so the Emperor can still be said to be wearing his clothes and nobody loses face?

This is an excellent article. Thank you for the link.

Shared it with a circle of friends who know my views. We generally only talk to each other about other stuff. A couple had dropped direct contact with me a while ago because they disagree with my views. Others had been silent. One has told me they are pleased I shared it. I'll take that as progress.

The Observer have been consistently GC for a good while now. Sonia Sodha in particular is great. I do love that online it looks like it's in the Guardian!