"Questioning gender law is not a form of transphobia" - article in the National

[morningtoncrescent62]

Very helpful article in Scottish indy paper The National by Carolyn Leckie who is well known to lefties in Scotland:

www.thenational.scot/news/16982498.questioning-gender-law-is-not-a-form-of-transphobia/

Tide is most definitely turning...

The fact that only a minority of people who identify as transgender have actually gone through the process demonstrates that the barriers required by the 2004 Act are too high.

From the article - I thought it was only ever meant for a very small number of people? So it's actually working as it should.

Somewhat surprised to read her use 'assigned' for sex at birth, given that she's a midwife or was once.

I think it's helpful that she seriously engages with the persecution and discrimination faced by transgender people. One of the (more justified) criticisms I've heard levelled at WPUK is that they are often silent on this, so come across as lacking in compassion and understanding. I think we'll get further if we acknowledge that there are two oppressed groups here, and we need to work together so that the rights of one don't trump the rights of the other.

So 'women - be nice' even the other side will fuck you over given the slightest chance.

WPUK would always have criticism levelled at them.

A very thoughtful piece and some good comments too.

We need to talk about this.

Yeah, I'm at the "a man won the gold medal at a women's cycling event" and "a rapist sexually abused women unable to escape in a prison" stage of this process. Being nice gets women fucked over.

They can have my support when they start asking for their own spaces.

Sorry if that was snarky... the article itself is good and welcome! Thanks for posting

One of the (more justified) criticisms I've heard levelled at WPUK is that they are often silent on this, so come across as lacking in compassion and understanding.
Nothing justified in that at all. It's not our problem to solve, not our responsibility to ensure anyone's personal happiness. Or to be forced to share other people's beliefs. In terms of safety we are no more compelled to act than any other concerned citizen, and we certainly aren't compelled to resolve the issue of men's spaces not being inclusive or safe enough because - guess what - it's not our problem to solve.
WPUK has remained silent on children's cancers, the future of the Siberian Tiger, STEM opportunities for girls, Boko Haram, slavery in Mauretania, and the plight of the world's oceans. You could argue that meant they didn't care about any of those things, or you could acknowledge none of these topics are relevant to the very specific and very carefully laid out arguments of WPUK,who have ensured everything they produce is factual and accurate.

Stonewall have been paid shedloads of money to take care of trans rights. The best they could come up with was TWAW - it makes a mockery of all the issues faced by those with gender dysphoria, it takes no account of all the differences between the numerous types of people under the effing umbrella and was a complete brain dead solution.

For trans rights, it is Stonewall that I am VERY angry with.

For WPUK, FPFW., PP.... all the lovely ladies (and some others) fighting this out... they have thanks from the bottom of my heart. I absolutely cannot criticise them for not thinking about trans rights. They were never supposed to.

I didn't really think this was a good article overall. It's better than nothing to have people speaking out but I found it rather appeasing and a little ignorant of what has actually been going on in this debate and transgender ideology in general.

She talks about the GRA setting too high a barrier which is why people don't apply but fails to recognise the goal post move in the ideology which denounces the need for medical treatment or dysphoria to be trans (in adults at least). There is no point in even having a GRC when 'I am what I say I am' has been enacted ahead of any laws.

She also says it's not helpful to use Karen White as an example. I very much disagree because the Karen White's are a huge part of the issue and she lacks clarity in what she means when saying KW should not be used as an excuse to deny rights to trans people.

KW is a trans person and by denying them access to a female prison you are denying them what they and others see as their right. Even after KW assaulted inmates.

A pick and choose risk assessment model for males in female prisons is doomed to have continuing failures and collateral damage in the shape of female prisoners.

The only way to avoid this is segregation purely by sex, transactivists are always going to claim this is a rights violation and where someone falls in this debate is going to depend on whether they value female safety and dignity above male feelings. Not everyone does.

Yeah I didn’t think was good article.
The fear was right there
Comments much better
She was afraid to write what we get

I was hopeful when I first saw the article but really disappointed after I read it, for all the reasons already quoted above. Not being allowed to use Karen White as an example, saying lessons will have been learned, was the worst. What's the point in asking for a debate if you can't use the most obvious, and recent, examples?

She seems more worried about being considered old and (though she doesn't use the phrase) 'on the wrong side of history'' than the actual impact on women.

My interpretation of the position taken by WPUK goes along the lines of, there are two oppressed groups here, neither of them responsible for each other's oppression, and we need to talk (and make good use of the evidence available to us) to make sure that in protecting/enhancing the rights of trans people we don't roll back on the rights and protection for women that have taken decades to achieve. That's a position I can get fully behind. And I think the article is consistent with that. It's not about 'women be nice' which obviously would not have won such rights and protections as we've got.

I agree that to us (engaged GC feminists) the article reads as cowardly and frustrating. But I do think that articles like this are important. People - especially those who see themselves as progressive - have been so indoctrinated with trans ideology that anything that comes across as overtly gender critical will be instantly dismissed by many many people without them engaging their brains. Articles that very gently shift the conversation to make people question and wonder a bit more do feel infuriating non-committal but I think can be very effective in getting more people to engage, which is what we desperately need.

The National is not exactly an SNP vehicle but I still think that an article that is so at odds with the SNP narrative around this would have been hard to get published and will be hard to get a lot of socially liberal progressives in Scotland to engage with. I think a very cautious article like this could well be more effective than something stronger.

My suspicion is that Carolyn Leckie is properly gender critical but is being tactical in what she talks about and how she presents things, and is also keen not to completely destroy her political career by saying anything that could be quoted as 'transphobic'. Given what has happened to Anne Henderson, I think it is actually quite brave to publicly say even as much as she has.

She may be worried about being "on the wrong side of history", but I think she also writing for people who are desperately anxious not to find themselves on the wrong side of history, and trying to allay their fears.

I found some of it frustrating but I kind of feel for her because she sounds like I would have done (if I'd dared open my mouth) a year or so ago. It's good that more and more people are putting their heads over the parapet.

so come across as lacking in compassion and understanding

And the TRA’s and the politians that support them, are they considering our side of the argument? No, we are called names purely because we want to maintain our rights and boundaries. Why does no one ever question their lack of compassion for women? Or are we all supposed to pretend that women, including old middle class white women, don’t suffer under patriarchy every damn day? Excuse me while I sit here quietly still waiting for bodily autonomy while some unknown male undresses in front of me.

Yes, I don't want to be considered 'lacking in compassion and understanding' because I can't accept four female prisoners being raped as collateral damage.

I think we'll get further if we acknowledge that there are two oppressed groups here, and we need to work together so that the rights of one don't trump the rights of the other.

The rights of one don't trump the other? Except, TRAs see women having any rights at all as transphobic. Women should have womens rights and womens spaces, tbh. And anyone who thinks this is an issue..for whatever reason, cares not a bit about women.