Scottish Govt Consultation. What did you think? What next for Gender Self ID?

[AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth]

Feeling a strange sense of relief now that the Scottish Consultation deadline is nearly done. Waiting for 5pm then hitting the wine, as there's still a no travel advice here.

What did you all think of it?

I used to do a lot of work in bid management and overall it seemed to me like a badly written and rigged bid request. It was as though they based the requirements of the proposal on a pre-selected solution. If I had produced like that I would have got my arse kicked and if we received such a rigged proposal (from a government, no less) it would be certainly be grounds for complaint.

Also, proposing that non binary status should be written into law is barking. Non binary has no basis in reality. Are they on drugs? I can't believe a government would release a proposal for legislation on the basis of complete and utter GUFF.

I am mixed about some of the SNP's proposal, for example, the named person proposal was a scandal, but they have done some good work. Have completely lost any respect for them now, releasing this shoddy work which will have an unprecedented impact on women, girls and on children with no obvious advantage to transgender people at all.

I do think that they will push it into law regardless. And given that most of Scotland or UK have no real understanding of the implications, I foresee a mighty shitstorm ahead.

Someone pointed me in the direction of the Scottish Family Party when I was saying how none of the political parties (apart from UKIP) are against self I.d.

I read through their website, don't agree with many of their policies but they have this particular subject nailed.

In relation to Church of Scotland, I fear that I am in a minority as gender critical. I interacted recently with another minister on a closed FB group about the line that trans women are women, and she was very much following the trans agenda. The others who undoubtedly read our exchange either remained silent, and a small number "liked" her posts. No one liked mine, and the only comment I got was a NAMALT!

@MarSeeAh
Thank you. Will it be brought to General assembly do you think?
(Btw hope my enemy/enemy comment didnt cause offence - it's only that I'm an atheist!)

@Waddlelikeapenguin

I used to be an atheist, so no offence taken!

I'm not at General Assembly this year, but I'm not aware of any plans to raise trans issues there. I've been doing my bit to raise awareness locally and in my own Presbytery, and when the document about welcoming trans and gnc individuals is released I intend to go through it very carefully, and will raise any concerns I have. It came about because a young woman, I think representing the Youth Assembly, proposed it from the floor of Assembly in 2015. I was a Commissioner that year and I spoke against her motion on the basis that although we should always be welcoming, this is a hugely complex issue on which the GA were voting without any depth of knowledge or awareness of trans issues. I was the only one who spoke against, and the motion was carried by a large majority.

@MarSeeAh well that's depressing!

Maybe we should follow the money? Single sex schools & women's sports? (Are there any women's sports that make money?!)

Waddle I did think it might peak trans the nation if a man won the Ladies title at Wimbledon.

Agreed smurf! I wonder if Andy Murray would be up for it when he retires - he's got good feminist credentials

Otoh maybe the GB team getting trounced at Olympics by lots of transwo men will do the deed?

I did it really early on and thought it was totally rigged. As a research exercise it would not have passed in an undergraduate course.

Lass I have to agree with your view about public consultations having a foregone conclusion.
But even with that caveat, the GRA consultation was still one of the most poorly constructed I have ever read.

A mixed doubles with Andy and Federrer... that will make people sit up and notice!