Urgent action for those in Scotland

[SusanSmithFWS]

The amazing Johann Lamont has put in an amendment to the forensic medical services bill. This is a really important piece of legislation which seeks to make the process easier for rape victims and we support it. We are concerned, however, that although the women who testified that access to a female examiner was the most important concern, the bill still refers to the gender - instead of sex - of the examiner.

Sex, unlike gender, is defined in the Equality Act and there is provision for recruitment under schedule 9. We believe that a small change will ensure that there is no ambiguity.

We would urge anyone from Scotland to please write to all eight of their MSPs and ask them to support the motion.

As Susan Dalgety reported in the Scotsman:
Her amendment may be only six words long – “for the word ‘gender’ substitute ‘sex’” – but it gets to the heart of the current debate about who counts as a woman.

“Women should be able to choose the sex of the person who conducts the investigation,” Johann told me last night. “This is a key test for the Parliament, which is committed to rooting action in the understanding of experience. Women courageously and powerfully spoke up so that others might fare better than them.

“The amendment is tiny but would be a huge step in listening to survivors. The committee was convinced. The Parliament should be too.”

Six words can make a world of difference.

www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/transgender-debate-msps-must-stand-womens-sex-based-rights-key-vote-bill-help-rape-victims-susan-dalgety-3057640

No, he's written it all by himself.

Voted against it because he thought it wouldn't make any difference. And in accordance with advice from rape Crisis, to paraphrase.

It's the sanctimonious reminding that this is about survivors, as of rape survivors didn't make up about two fifths of the female population, that gets me. These men mean well, perhaps, but they have no real idea of issues faced by women.

It's the sanctimonious reminding that this is about survivors, as of rape survivors didn't make up about two fifths of the female population, that gets me. These men mean well, perhaps, but they have no real idea of issues faced by women.

I honestly don't believe that they think beyond the party/tribal line, especially on issues that won't directly affect them.

Apart from everything that's been discussed here, it's disgusting that an issue like this is being used to play politics and virtue signal ideological positions - I have nothing but utter contempt for those who have behaved in this way.

@334bu

mobile.twitter.com/mbmpolicy/status/1337372353446240264

Govt funded groups still challenging definition of female today.

Oh ffs

The Greens knew exactly what they were doing. They deliberately threw rape victims under the bus (or attempted to). I sent them all the evidence of the SNP making it clear that gender and sex meant different things. Just in case they hadn't already read it. And pleaded to them to think of the effect on traumatised women who had just been raped. They don't give a toss.

I was in the SGP for many years. The SGP I joined with Robin Harper as MSP would have voted for the amendment. Mr Harvie has turned it in to the party of woke identity politics, misogyny and intolerance

I was in the SGP for about 5 minutes, before I realised what being a member of a political party actually entailed.

I see the (blessedly) former women's convener is busy wanging off on Twitter again. Not a happy bunny at all.

Who's that?
What is she saying?

@theskyispink

I see the (blessedly) former women's convener is busy wanging off on Twitter again. Not a happy bunny at all.

Not as bad as Fiona Robertson who has just tweeted that women shared graphic stories about their rapes without putting a trigger warning on it and some people found this very distressing, and they did this to make a point about excluding trans people.

How much lower are they going to sink on this?

Not as bad as Fiona Robertson who has just tweeted that women shared graphic stories about their rapes without putting a trigger warning on it and some people found this very distressing, and they did this to make a point about excluding trans people

Are these people really saying it is transphobic to expect female / women FMEs to exclude transwomen?

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine seriously? ☹😮😮

Yesterday we were just foolish and misguided to think this would make a difference in law, today we are evil transphobes - even, and perhaps especially, those from the rape survivor groups. How they managed to keep so restrained until after the vote is incredible.

[quote Galvantula]@ItsAllGoingToBeFine seriously? ☹😮😮[/quote]
I may have phrased my post badly. I'll try again.

Fiona Robertson et al seem to be saying that it is transphobic to not allow transwomen to act as FMEs for women who have requested a female examiner.

Ugh. Just looked at her Twitter feed.:(

I meant that to pearpickingporky. Sorry itsall

I've just read the statement from Fiona Robertson. It's on the granite and sunlight blog.

I'm shocked that trans rights are being centred in a discussion around the provision of services to victims of sexual assault and rape. How dare they? There is, quite rightly, a time and a place (and legislation) for the protection of transpeople and it is not this.

There is, quite rightly, a time and a place (and legislation) for the protection of transpeople and it is not this.

This.^

These people are unbelievable. Honestly absolutely disgusting.

twitter.com/KirstySNP/status/1337468204847919111?s=20

They are also saying that Rape Crisis Scotland have been "bullied off twitter". Anyone know what happened? I suspect it was more robust disagreement than "bullying".

Well, I agree with Rhiannon Spear's line about 'both sides' there, and that's not something I say ever often.

But they can fuck off with the 'weaponising'.

This is a word I want to never, EVER, see used in relation to women talking about their experiences of violence, rape and abuse. It's abhorrent, and unbelievable that some people think it acceptable to describe it as such.

Remember, women: talking about the reasons you don't want a male-bodied person intimately examining you is 'weaponising' your experience. You should presumably just never ever mention your experiences or reasoning, shut up about your feelings and accept that males' emotions matter more.

Yes, I've seen all the guff about Rape Crisis Scotland being bullied off twitter. They haven't posted any evidence of this vile campaign of bullying though. I've seen some pointed replies to them following their disgraceful letter to MSPs but nothing anywhere near abusive.

Mridhul wadhwa declared on Twitter recently that they had had enough and would publish all the abuse they received.

A handful of tweets followed asking why as a male they felt it appropriate to manage a service largely there to treat traumatised women.

It was not abusive. Factual statements, disagreement, questions- this is what is now apparently termed abuse for some people.

Not women though, you can threaten them with pictures of goddesses beheading their enemies and that's totally harmless fun, of course. Violent imagery is okay if you are the right kind of oppressed.

I don't know if rape Crisis received abuse or were bullied, but it seems some people have different definitions for these terms.

Humza definitely has different views on abuse online

He got ratiioed on Twitter. Yesterday.

Never seen him stand up for Joanna cherry or Joan MacAlpine

Re Kirsty Blackman’s statement that sex and gender don’t have different meanings.

So why were they hell bent on changing the word from sex - as advised, to gender?

Pure gaslighting.

Agreed with PPs that to couch this away from the needs of rape victims - mainly women - is grotesque.

This serves both men and women - and transgender victims of assault - to choose the sex of the medical examiner. Men often prefer women too after assault for understandable reasons.

This is the natural conclusion that ‘being kind’ is manifestly unkind.

Sunlight. The majority of people can see exactly what this means.

So to some people, certain women only wrote to their MSPs and supported the amendment to change ‘gender’ to ‘sex’ because we wanted to get one over or make life difficult for trans women? They believe there was an agenda that had NOTHING to do with minimising the trauma of rape victims and EVERYTHING to do with making life difficult for trans women and a chance to exclude them from choices that every other woman has (in this case, to be employed as a Forensic Examiner and carry out these intimate examinations of victims of rape)

Or they think that by wanting this change of wording we instantly extinguished the idea that there should be a drive to recruit more female forensic examiners.

They honestly do not believe our motives came from a place of wanting to provide victims of rape with the support that they need at a time of extreme crisis. That a woman has the right to make that request and express that preference.

Johann Lamont shouldn’t have had to make that angry, passionate speech yesterday. This amendment made total, legal sense. It is only certain factions within the trans gender community that made this into a battering ram, that made women have to dredge up harrowing testimony to try and make unfeeling, selfish, agenda seeking individuals understand.

I don’t know what is going on behind the scenes within Rape Crisis Scotland. I imagine, in the main, it is being run by passionate, caring individuals trying to operate a service with insufficient funding and over-stretched resources. I feel sorry for the individuals within this organisation who have not lost sight of their organisation’s aims. Who are appalled that suddenly they are on a side in this argument that absolutely does NOT centre the rights, thoughts and feelings of women who have been raped.

There’s a bunch of Lib Dem’s bleating on Twitter how this amendment has ‘removed rights’.

We were told this change of wording didn’t matter. Sex and gender are interchangeable and that it made no difference.

Suddenly once the wording is changed, it makes all the difference and has removed rights?

If they could at least be consistent in their bullshit it would be helpful!