No self ID in Scotland!

[Bowlofbabelfish]

Or ‘nice one Joan McAlpine’

www.scottishlegal.com/article/scottish-government-abandons-plans-over-gender-self-identification-following-backlash

Apologies if this has already been posted, I haven’t seen it.

Does it mean we can challenge a male in womens spaces,and not get a call from police?

I'm in England, inot Scotland, but I have promised myself that if I ever encounter a male invading the ladies I will challenge him if I don't feel in physical danger. I am old enough to not give a shit, plus I have the old dear factor. The police are inclined to favour well spoken elderly women. We are, I've read, the most law abiding demographic by a long road.

Does it mean we can challenge a male in women's spaces and not get a call from police?

Yes. This has always been the case. The Equality Act 2010, Schedule 3, section 27, subsection 6 has always permitted this:

(6) The condition is that—

(a) the service is provided for, or is likely to be used by, two or more persons at the same time, and

(b) the circumstances are such that a person of one sex might reasonably object to the presence of a person of the opposite sex.

See Schedule 3 and scroll down to section 27 [Single sex services]

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3

[see also sections 26 [Separate services for the sexes] and 28 Gender reassignment]]

In addition, here are the Explanatory Notes relating to Single sex provision [sections 26, 27 and 28]

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7

Further, the Equality Act is civil law, not criminal law, so the police do not engage in any way since no crime is involved here.

The government has to define what is meant by 'living as a man/woman' in order to see if the lifestyle of a person who claims to be living as the opposite sex conforms to those expectations.

And this is (I hope) going to be the weak point. When replying to the consultation it will be important to point out the impossibility of defining "living as a wo/man". I have a sliver of hope that the whole thing will fall over on that point.

There was always have to be compromise. I’m under no illusion that things will stay the way they are. But at least they didn’t jump into it with two feet.

The framing of the article is really surprising (in a good way) even down to referring to them as 'trans lobbyists' and the emphasis on how much money these groups are paid.
Like others have said its not over yet though. The article misses some v important parts of the government's plans.

I saw a tweet calling Joan McAlpine; Saint Joan of Scotland. From now on, that is what I shall call her.

There was always have to be compromise.

This is a stance that has to be fought down. The GRA 2004 was the compromise for women. It's proved that any infringement of sex categories or sex based rights of women ends in a battle over how much of them can be commandeered for men. Any compromise is merely giving some of women's rights away to men instead of all, and it will merely be the starting point for the TRA political lobby to target the next slice, and the next, because their compromise is accepting some of what they want instead of all, and the precedent is now there that women's rights are something that can be removed and given to men under enough pressure.

The answer for women has to be no. Women's rights cannot be compromised on, they won't accept just some of their rights (for the moment) being appropriated for men, sex based rights has to mean a hard line. The GRA was a compromise for women and it failed. There has to be a different solution found. It's looking increasingly like the common sense version most people go to is sex being a fixed, unchanged fact; gender being fully respected as whatever people want it to be and sex and gender are recorded separately; third spaces and resources are provided for people who wish to be treated in their chosen gender but cannot access the single sex provisions which in some cases must be protected for the need and equality of biological females.

In essence: TW are TW, an identity to be celebrated and valued, but TW are not biological women and the two groups at times have different needs, and equality means different treatment.

This position has already tacitly been acknowledged by the Scots gov when they realised they couldn't remove sex categories from the census nor keep school guidance that excluded some girls from girls only spaces when children with trans identity used them.

I dearly wish that the poster who referred to all SNP supporters as rabid and declared we were blind to faults and failing every other woman with our crap parliament and just dreadful (without mentioning Boris et al) sees this.

I've never, ever been prouder to be a Scottish woman.

Hopefully the trans bubble will burst before Scotland get around to actually passing the reform bill.

Assuming it will burst! This seems like a stupid fad in so many ways, but it's also so much more than a stupid fad. Nobody ever passed legislation about legwarmers.

So I go back and forth between "the bubble will burst soon" and "downhill to dystopia."

This is awesome. It'll be a cold day in hell before I ever vote SNP but Joan McAlpine is amazing and wry string in standing up to the party line.

Mhairi Black is a disgrace and I tweeted her to say so.