Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Definition of woman banned from buses in Edinburgh

58 replies

PimmsnLemonade · 11/10/2018 00:38

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/feminist-poster-banned-because-it-could-offend-trans-people-s2fkwc5sb

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
AlvinStardustsGloves · 11/10/2018 14:15

The Scottish government has already created a law which has completely redefined the words 'woman' and 'female'.

In the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, you can read that "woman” includes a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (within the meaning of section 7 of the Equality Act 2010) if, and only if, the person is living as a woman and is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of becoming female.

(It's in Section under 'Key Definitions')

www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2018/4/section/1/enacted

So there need not be any change at all, or any legal commitment. Simply "proposing to undergo" etc etc is good enough for a male-bodied person to be classed as a woman, and no definition is given of how anyone will know when that person has "become female".

FPFW has an easy-read account of this :
fairplayforwomen.com/scottish_stole_woman/

AlvinStardustsGloves · 11/10/2018 14:16
  • Section 2, under Key Definitions.
rosablue · 11/10/2018 14:59

Wonder what would happen if they tried to run a similar poster but with the definition on there for man rather than woman...

FekkoTheLawyer · 11/10/2018 15:01

maybe they should Hmm

MoltenLasagne · 11/10/2018 15:11

Hannah Pearson, of the Equality Network, backed the decision to ban the signs from buses and argued it was the “vehement anti-trans” campaign behind them, rather then the definition of women itself, which caused offence.

The recent decision with the bakery and their right to be compelled to say something they disagree with seems relevant here. In that case, the bakery won because they were happy to sell a cake to a gay couple, but didn't want to be compelled to write a message they disagreed with on it. i.e. they were willing to provide the same service to customers, but not to be compelled to say something they didn't believe.

What the advertising company seems to be saying is the reverse of this - that they are perfectly happy with the wording, but that they don't want to be providing a service to a particular group. Does any legal-type person know whether this would therefore constitute discrimination?

Plainspeak · 11/10/2018 15:22

re the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018; Since no male can do anything towards the "purpose of becoming female" other than have all his genes replaced, the whole thing is still total bollocks.

To make it work they would have to redefine the word female as well.

How any court could think of upholding something so inadequately defined and reasoned I have no idea. It is a total embarrassment.

The bus thing is a disgrace. I am raging

SueCorstorphine · 11/10/2018 21:58

This is madness, it’s great lots of people agree here. In the man front my partner thinks if urinals are all removed people may wake up and realise that the changes inflicted on our girls are unacceptable.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread