Sturgeon: SC ruling risks making trans lives "unliveable"

“It certainly doesn’t make a single woman any safer to do that because the threat to women comes from predatory and abusive men.”

Correct. But as I've said all along men don't need to go through all the time and trouble of becoming trans just to commit a sex offence in a woman's space. There's nothing stopping a cisgendered man just walking into a woman's toilet and doing something.

The 5+ years Britain has spent obsessing about trans people now isn't of benefit to anyone and isn't actually addressing the root cause of why male violence happens in the first place. It's all about IMHO having a target group of people to blame and demonise. In the 90s it was homosexuals but now open homophobia isn't tolerated anymore people seem to have moved onto trans people instead or homophobia in disguise (I notice a lot of gay individuals, gay establishments and gay rights charities are attacked and demonised by the GC community too if they support trans people which most do).

I sense you're somewhat peeved, Arabella!

'...when the mighty fall, they tumble hard. The Sturgeon government’s gender recognition reforms now serve as shorthand for a broader appraisal: her government, even more than most, privileged symbolism over substance and magical thinking over reality. Her later days were a series of policy disasters and political embarrassments.'

Alex Massie's comment on NS in the Times today. I think it can be summarized with "yesterday's jam"
https://www.thetimes.com/article/27cf4a44-8d30-44e4-878e-e2e7fcba6e3d?shareToken=9f42e2d901faf91ed515a2cdb6ff1220

The only way in which I can see that the ruling " makes trans lives unliveable" is, maybe, in the sense that the illusion of one's 'gender identity' being the exact same thing as one' s sex has now been shattered...apart from that - all that is required to go about one's business is a unisex facility and some dedicated services.

Maybe she's not very bright

She's a fucking liar, basically.

She was my MSP for a while and she was fucking dreadful. Entirely focussed on her own ambition. She did have skill as a politician, put on a good performance and mastered spin, but it's increasingly worn thin. Her mannerisms and speech patterns are well rehearsed - they were effective for a while, but they now drive me up the fucking wall. I suppose she's playing to the gallery.

She's still apparently appealing for some, seeing the reflection of a great leader in a shallow puddle on a hot day.

As a long-time subscriber of the NS, I have not been impressed by their decision to give Nicola a nice little job as a book reviewer! That soon cancellled up the brownie points I had awarded them for adding Hannah Barnes to their staff! The front of the woman; she is lucky she's not in jail.

Tbf she has to keep her grift/earning potential going. She has a book coming out and even if she backtracked now actual feminists aren’t going to buy it so she’s dependent on the ‘TWAW’ believers.

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-netted-640k-stepping-34475833

I've put 'trans' people in inverted commas there because I think politicians have used a mythical group of hypothetical people as a fable.

People who identify as trans definitely exist and are protected in law. They're human beings like any other.

What politicians like Sturgeon have done is create a group of people that they posit should somehow exist outwith the bounds of the usual rules and laws applicable to other people. This group of sacred 'trans' people apparently are incapable of bad faith or of breaking laws or of predatory intent.

We can see this in the cringeingly patronising rhetoric of 'they just need to be loved' etc. Other groups of people aren't subjected to this pablum. I can only assume politicians who seek to use this hypothetical group don't in fact see trans people as real, living, breathing, fallible human beings.

Perhaps she’s hoping for the full guidance to set out all the sexes, which according to Nicola are:

1. men
2. women
3. rapists

with discussion tabled as to whether a fourth sex covering ‘men in kilts’ needs to be added.

I think the main reason political parties in general have adopted these policies is complete failure to analyse impact on women. (Also true of Goodwin judgement that preceded GRA)

However the SNP in particular adopted self ID as a policy to differentiate from rUK - They had to be first and go further. Sense checking was not a consideration.

Similar in London - 60% remain

Edited to add, I recognise this is a pointless factoid in a thread about Sturgeon. It is just a kneejerk reaction having been lectured by many friends at home about how appallingly different London is on important issues such as this.

Herself.

People are always going on at JKR about her legacy and she always replies in words to the effect of "I'm not thinking about my legacy, it's not about me, it's about protecting women and girls." That's why she does the right thing; because it's right, not because she thinks it'll bring her glory.

Sturgeon is thinking about herself and her status and her legacy. She thought she could gain glory by leading what she sold as a civil rights movement but is of course a pervert's paradise whose damage to women and children is now well established and will probably never be fully known because we will never know all the women and girls who just self excluded. Sturgeon has no humility so she won't see this, and she still thinks she can gain A Legacy if she doubles down hard enough.

Sturgeon is Cornelius Fudge.

Ah, that makes sense - there’s still big money in ‘equality’ charities.

I've mostly assumed it was all hypothetical. The politicians thought "trans' people were a tiny handful of inconsequential nobodies they could use as martyrs to further their own sanctification. All a big sob story with no costs.

They couldn't see the effects on women because of entrenched misogyny.

I really wonder who she's doing this for? And why?

Well, not in Scotland. About 63% voted Remain iirc

There is a school of thought that the SNP don't really want independence because they then wouldn't be 'necessary'. Could that be at least part of sturgeon's reason for jumping on the ideological bandwagon in the first place?

This. This is what I find so completely and utterly baffling.

The only thing that makes sense is the idea of extreme moral superiority and demonisation of 'the other side' to the point of lunacy. Thus you must 'be kind' beyond the point of reasoning.

I still can't quite wrap my head around it, despite having spent time with lib dems and 2nd referrs. Despite my reservations about certain things about that there was a point where I felt they went too far and I said as much. It was the tone deafness and when they started sounding like Eddie Izzard. The lesson I took was to listen and not cast 'the other side' as meaning ill. They often had very good intentions even if slightly misplaced.

But yeah it's a paradox I still struggle to get my head around despite understanding it.

I still find it odd that many of the people who pointed out the unavoidable existence of the Good Friday Agreement have been completely unable to acknowledge the material consequences of sex.

Sorry Sturgeon, actually it's TRAs that are STILL making trans people's lives more difficult.

I think we all need that little video clip of the Scottish woman reacting to Sturgeon's tour and paid meet&greet. Let me see if I can find it.

The thing that Brexshit and Trans have in common in terms of how politicians have handled them (badly). Those slogans.

Get Brexit Done.
Transwoman are women.
Stop the boats.

All thought terminating cliches that avoid the difficult process of acknowledging it's really not that simple and avoiding the obvious

How?

I think to a certain extent this is also why COVID also went tits up but it's less obvious and clear cut (and why we now have a backlash that's spawned a thousand conspiracy theories)

Absolutely. People want easy answers; sort Brexit out, stop the boats. But in the real world, it's not like that. If there was an easy way to 'stop the boats', the current govt would already have done it. So short of machine-gunning them in the water, what other plans do you have? It's a fair question.