Scottish Government redefines "woman" in law.

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

www.gov.scot/publications/gender-representation-public-boards-scotland-act-2018-statutory-guidance/pages/2/

2.12 Section 2 of the Act provides that for the purposes of the Act, "woman" includes "a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (within the meaning of section 7 of the Equality Act 2010[2]) 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".

2.13 To be included, a trans woman without a UK Gender Recognition Certificate or without gender recognition from another EU Member State[3] must therefore meet the 3 following criteria:

1. have the characteristic of gender reassignment as defined in the Equality Act 2010.

The definition of gender reassignment in the Equality Act 2010 is – "a person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex". This definition includes those reassigning their sex from male to female as well as those reassigning their sex from female to male. A person who meets this definition is not covered by the definition of "woman" in the Act unless they also meet the following two criteria. The person does not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery[4]

1. be proposing to undergo, is undergoing or undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning their sex to female

This element of the definition means that a person with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment is only covered if they are proposing to undergo, is undergoing or have undergone a process to reassign their sex to female. A person reassigning their sex from female to male would not be included in the definition of woman for the purposes of the Act.

1. be living as a woman

This would not require the person to dress, look or behave in any particular way. However, it would be expected that there would be evidence that the person was continuously living as a woman, such as – always using female pronouns; using a female name on official documents such as a driving licence or passport, or on utility bills or bank accounts; using female titles; updating the gender marker to female on official documents such as a driving licence or passport; describing themselves and being described by others in written or other communication as a woman.

As an aside, I find it terrifying how Scottish Trans sticky fingers seem to be all over legislation in Scotland. Even bills that, on the surface, don't concern them at all.

FFS. This is depressing.

This was snuck in as a late amendment to the Gender Representation on Public Boards Act so, at the time, the public had no chance to respond. It was passed a couple of years ago but the act was put out to consultation last year.

Why would you have a consultation on an Act that was already passed?!

I agree that there must be a legal way to challenge this... How can the Scottish government undermine the UK Equality Act?

How do we get a judicial review?

The SNP have gone too far this time. Sneaky, underhanded, patronising. Last time they get my vote. Furious.

@Aesopfable

Is the Scottish Government entitled to change reserved legislation through secondary legislation within the Scottish Parliament? Seems unlikely.

I think there's a lacuna here in how legislation works. Often (important disclaimer - I am not a lawyer, this is gleaned from many years ago working as a very junior civil servant on a team drafting legislation) Acts of Parliament have a main text and various schedules. My understanding is that in order to amend the main body of the text, you have to have the matter debated in Parliament (this is how it works with Westminster legislation) whereas with the schedules, amendments just have to be "laid before parliament", i.e. notification has to be put out that a change is in the offing.

This is typically used for things like lists of endangered species, or the different classes of illegal substances - things that would typically be updated on expert advice, that parliament needs to know about but doesn't need to waste time discussing.

I can quite see how this process could be misused with regard to changing legislation, for instance, if you put the definition of "woman" in a schedule rather than the main body of the text.

I've been quietly worried about this with the Equalities Act for some time; the sections clarifying that it is indeed possible for sex and gender reassignment as protected characteristics to come into conflict, and the examples showing that it is lawful to discriminate on the basis of gender reassignment in order to protect single sex spaces where there is a proportionate need for single sex spaces - these are all in the schedules at the end, if memory serves me right.

Thank you Cara, that is concerning. I suppose the difference here is that a different legislative body is reinterpreting the Act.

I'm really unsure about how Judicial Review works. I think there are grounds about legality and human rights? I did see something about time limits though, so assume it would need to be soon?

Furious as well that our toothless feminist organisation, Engender, have said nothing about this. They get hundreds of thousands from government supposedly to protect women's rights but essentially act as the SNP's nodding dog.

I really don't understand how MSPs can look at the figures for women murdered by men (about 3 a week) and pass this crap.

We are killed, raped, harassed, exploited and dismissed because of our sex.

Why are they doing this? Do they not realise that women vote, and there's more of us than the handful of morons at Scottish Trans Alliance?

It's staggering.

Am I wrong to I suspect that Nicola believes the independence vote will make all this meaningless. That people will vote for SNP to secure independence despite this. Or am I looking at this the wrong way?

Is there anything we can do about this?

Vet I'm sure FWS and MBM will be working on plans - esp if judicial review is possible - but I suppose write. I'd bombard the minister, Christina McKelvie on the legality issue and ignoring consultation (her son is one of the SNP youth TRA boys but, in a way, that's useful as it proves bias).

Also, I think we should demand answers from Engender. Why aren't they representing those they are handsomely paid to represent? Perhaps also write to Msps questioning their funding.

I’m up for a letter writing campaign.

'A petition for judicial review needs to be lodged within three months of the date of the decision/omission/action to the supervisory jurisdiction of the Court. '

www.slab.org.uk/guidance/petition-for-judicial-review/

Brain wash kids & companies that they must use “preferred pronouns” —> declare pronouns to be indicative of sex —> destroy what little protection the equalities act gives women.

Slow hand clap for the SNP juggernaut that just keeps going until slapped about by the Supreme Court.

Just read through this thread and I now literally feel sick. I have Scottish roots and have always thought that if England goes the way I dread, I could relocate to Scotland where people are more sensible. But no.

Also up for letter writing, a JR fundraiser.

ForWomenScot will be along to advise I think.

Does that mean it's too late for a judicial review?

I'm so disgusted by the constant undermining of women's rights. They take our definitions from us as well.

For instance, speaking at an event on the political representation of women in 2018, Liberal Democrat President Sally Brinton stated that she would be happy with a ‘gender-balanced’ parliament made up of 50% men and 50% trans women.

I will never forgive nor forget the women and men who steamroll over women's rights like this.

Who is Christina McKelvie's son Alice?

Dances, Jack McKelvie. He's deleted some of his comments but he seems connected to people like Cameron Archibald. He was also bemoaning the new independence Party stand on women's rights, claiming they "hated people for who they are".

twitter.com/SofonisbaAngui7/status/1259182522862383105?s=20

Thanks Alice

AAAAAGH!!!!!

There is only ONE way to live as a woman and that is to BE* a fucking woman!

I won't give up. I remain optimistic. There will be an end to this shit!

Can someone give it to me in one sentence - I’m just going to tell my sister who seems to think the sun now shines out of wee Nic’s backside. I haven’t the strength to distil it down to a short message.

Q

That’s too short...

Can one of you please send any tweets about this to baroness Nicholson on Twitter.
I have emailed her but she is busy and may not see my email for days.

For instance, speaking at an event on the political representation of women in 2018, Liberal Democrat President Sally Brinton stated that she would be happy with a ‘gender-balanced’ parliament made up of 50% men and 50% trans women.

She - who also argued that mixed sex toilets aren’t a risk for women/girls because women are also sex offenders - conveniently forgetting the vast majority of sex offenders are male and the vast majority of victims are female.

I will never forgive nor forget the women and men who steamroll over women's rights like this.

The list is now rather long.

Hi Lord will this do

Nicola thinks men can be women and this is to be enshrined in Scottish law so women, as a group or category, now includes men.