Is any one just a little bit gleeful right now?

I agree. There has been and will be more desperate pivoting and we can't afford to be complacent. But this is a big win.

SinnerBoy · Today 12:36
Sadly, I think that there's a lot of truth in what you say. On the other hand, it's has certainly gained a lot of attention and people who may previously have been ambivalent about the subject are now thing: "WTF? Most of them don't have surgery? I thought they all had to, to get a certificate."

I'm wondering how many people have assumed that any of these grown adult men giving diversity talks at work, joining the police, going into your children's schools, going into the women's changing rooms, toilets, prisons and rape centres and women's hostels have been cockless with a GRC. Because I'd bet they would be surprised to find out that probably most of them still had a penis and had no GRC.

TheKeatingFive · Today 11:15

So actually, I don't think it is about the women prisoners, sad a conclusion as that is. People don't want to be openly mocked and that is what Adam is doing.

Sadly, I think that there's a lot of truth in what you say. On the other hand, it's has certainly gained a lot of attention and people who may previously have been ambivalent about the subject are now thing: "WTF? Most of them don't have surgery? I thought they all had to, to get a certificate."

A lot, possibly most, won't think it through much more than that, but a reasonable number will take an interest, discuss it with family and friends and give it longer currency. That has to be a good thing, don't you think? Keep it going as a pot boiler and every time there's a similar case, speaking up about it.

Prior to last week, it was only the Mail and a few other tabloids reporting the subject with any degree of balance, or honesty; now, the broadsheets and TV news have picked up on it as a big story (well, perhaps excepting the BBC).

But if some TW are admitted to be “fake” then the whole self-ID project goes down the toilet and we’re back to “gatekeeping”.

We're in Wales so if our MPs AMs cock up like this their card is marked. Locals will chase down pictures, interviews and put them up at every opportunity to remind us what they said, what they believe during their term when elections draw near. They just don't get in again.

The SNP have a big problem with low grade MPs which needs addressing

So they’ll fudge it. TWAW at all times. Because they say so. But obviously not that rapist. Because… mumble… mumble … you’re all bigots

I totally agree that's what they'll try to do. But after last week it's going to be very hard to maintain that fudge.

I don't think the war is won, far from it, but the sunlight that's been shone on the charming Adam has changed the terms considerably.

I think they’ll follow Sturgeon and totally fudge that.

They’re not going to openly discuss what the objective criteria might be … because all that will do is force them to admit that there’s nothing but stereotypes and nonsense to base their ideas on.

There’s material reality - actual biology - and as soon as you move away from that, there really isn’t anything that isn’t a more or less offensive stereotype to base the claim to womanhood on.

So they’ll fudge it. TWAW at all times. Because they say so. But obviously not that rapist. Because… mumble… mumble … you’re all bigots.

I worry that the rhetoric will seek to further sanctify the TW category by creating the fake TW/predatory men category as a foil. We simply won’t be able to talk about the problematic people and behaviour of TW because ‘they’re not real TW’.

In this case, the TRAs will need to get a lot more specific on what defines a TW.

Currently it's anyone who says they are. No questions, no debate.

But what actual workable definition/criteria could differentiate from those who 'really are' and those who 'say they are'?

I am looking forward to the checklist being published so we can definitively know which are real and which are not.

I think we can keep asking for that every time. Maybe they will get the hint and cease the extreme demands and actually be forced to discuss realistic solutions that don't affect women and children's safety, opportunities, and the need for dignity and privacy.

maybe.

think there are two ways to mentally reconcile Sturgeon's "solution" of sending Bryson to a man's prison with her previously stated views. The press is focusing on the explanation that she's admitting that TWANW; TWAM even if only in a few select situations. But the other possibility is that Bryson is not a transwoman.

Yes. I suspect that we will see a separation between real TW and fake TW, and a doubling down on (real) TWAW.

Obviously, it can only be a good thing if the idea that not all men presenting as TW are genuine, or doing so for acceptable reasons, means the authorities and TRAs need to recognise the importance of checks and oversight.

But I think they’re going to double down on the TWAW while obfuscating and distracting to avoid answering any definitional questions that would enable anyone to distinguish between real and fake TW. There will be much more vitriol around ‘bigotry’ as a way of preventing any sensible discussion of what a woman is and how you could possibly know who is really a woman and who is actually just a predatory man.

And that’s also reinforcing the stupid distinction that keeps getting repeated about (real) TW vs ‘predatory men’, as if there’s no possibility that someone could be both. The argument seems to go ‘stop equating TW with predatory men’ as a means of shutting down any discussion of the overlap between the two categories. I worry that the rhetoric will seek to further sanctify the TW category by creating the fake TW/predatory men category as a foil. We simply won’t be able to talk about the problematic people and behaviour of TW because ‘they’re not real TW’.

Note to the deliberately obtuse: asking questions about this stuff is not the same
as saying that all TW are predatory or problematic. We need to stop positioning some groups as beyond question (it is always exploited).

I don't think it's a coincidence that Scotland's attempt to change the law and England's response to scupper it was swiftly followed by pink penis leggings.
Someone saw a fortuitous gap in Nicola Sturgeons armour and has poked a hole.
NS has been toeing the line for the Green vote but I think had an eye on leverage for independence.
I think she may have picked the wrong issue. This chap wasn't the first heading for a cushy time in the women's prison but he has been the fall guy for this nonsensical policy.

But but Jordan Grey?? Talk about accentuating a cock

Yeah, but in an 'entertainment' context it feels quite different. I use that word very loosely.

Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification by Timur Kuran www.goodreads.com/book/show/1016932.Private_Truths_Public_Lies

This book?

I'm mostly still very angry. Everything that has been highlighted and talked about in the MSM could have been talked about 5 -20 years ago.

Yes it's good seeing Sturgeon and others put on the spot but the way we've been gaslighted over all this and still are to a large extent is infuriating and painful.

This has all been a solid battle victory and we've taken significant ground but around us the war rages on.

TheKeatingFive But my suspicion is that the picture of Isla/Ad am did a lot of heavy lifting. The ridiculous juxtaposition of cosplay as woman, while still accentuating the cock.
It captures the absurdity of the trans identifying position. The brazenness of these men. The offensiveness of it all. He's taking us all for fools and that picture captured it perfectly.

But but Jordan Grey?? Talk about accentuating a cock

How weird! Was listening to this last night. Could be this?
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-4-conformity-and-preference-falsification/id1547906133?i=1000508197168

I don’t really think of it as fortuitous, more that there are enough of these men doing this at any time, that it was bound to happen.

Plus the timing has been fortuitous. had this happened in November it would be very different right now.

Also I think some press were just waiting for the chance to show the absolute absurdity of the whole thing. Considering their wings are currently clipped on what they can say, it must be infuriating for some of them.

Yes totally agree

Plus the timing has been fortuitous. had this happened in November it would be very different right now.

Also I think some press were just waiting for the chance to show the absolute absurdity of the whole thing. Considering their wings are currently clipped on what they can say, it must be infuriating for some of them.

And yet here we are - it is the rapists in prison issue that has peaked people. But why now? Why not Karen White or Tiffany Scott or all the other cases? Scotland has been putting violent men in the women's estate for nine years, after all.

Yes, really interesting question.

I didn't think it would be women prisoners either. I thought it would be sportspeople.

But my suspicion is that the picture of Isla/Ad am did a lot of heavy lifting. The ridiculous juxtaposition of cosplay as woman, while still accentuating the cock.

It captures the absurdity of the trans identifying position. The brazenness of these men. The offensiveness of it all. He's taking us all for fools and that picture captured it perfectly.

The way in which the media positioned it also told its own tale, with some outlets cropping at the waist and others not. Why desist from showing the full image? What kind of craven position is that?

So actually, I don't think it is about the women prisoners, sad a conclusion as that is. People don't want to be openly mocked and that is what Adam is doing.

No I am just angry 😡

Thankfully, as I'm not an ornithologist, I've never been close enough to a Robin to have to correctly sex it!

But I did get close to the window and I could just about make out f....y...f...u...doh! Then it pooped on the window sill and flew off.

I think there are two ways to mentally reconcile Sturgeon's "solution" of sending Bryson to a man's prison with her previously stated views. The press is focusing on the explanation that she's admitting that TWANW; TWAM even if only in a few select situations. But the other possibility is that Bryson is not a transwoman.

For Sturgeon at the moment, 1 is a hell of a lot easier to admit than 2, which opens up a huge can of worms on the showpiece GRR (although not directly relevant to this specific case at the moment) by suggesting that pure self-ID is not a "no-brainer", unproblematic good. While the admission that TWANW is progress - especially if the press and public can stay interested long enough to apply this insight to other areas where single-sex spaces and services have been compromised - I'd also like the worms opened, please.

Re the "moment of truth" -- when White (sort of) hit the headlines, the prevailing narrative was that trans people were born in the wrong body, had always been the sex (not just the gender) they "identified as" but had been "assigned" the wrong one, and had been forced to go through the wrong puberty. Karen's stubble was off limits to anyone but evil bigots: just be kind and pretend she looks feminine. Plus feminists wouldn't criticise a 50-something "CIS" woman's facial hair or post-menopausal masc-leaning facial features, so it's bigoted to say about a trans woman.

With Bryson, though ... I don't think the wider Scottish public was fully prepared for a surprise female penis. People aren't generally complete idiots. And it's very clear the female socialisation is missing, too ... I'll let Blair Waldorf explain it:

100% no debate acceptance.
Isn't that what we are told?

So either these offenders are women or they are not.
They can't be women for some areas of life and not others.

If they are not being sent to female prisons then it's because they are not seen as women for that particular scenario.
Why?
Is it because the whole thing is a giant fiction, but sometimes sex actually MATTERS and has to over-ride people's feelings? This is where we have got to after lying to these people that we accept them fully as women. They believe that they can have unfettered access to all female spaces and services set up for and designed for females - but they cannot.
Because they will always be male.

For those howling TRAs that still believe these people belong in the female estate....would you be happy with your female relative sharing a prison cell with an intact violent male rapist?

If not, why not?
Is it because they are in fact, actually MALE, and that sometimes, sex matters?
Is it because men do not belong confined with women? Is it because you know they are actually male, but your ideology won't let you admit that lest the whole house of shitty cards comes tumbling down?

I feel honoured. Not as much as the cat does though.