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

I suppose when you reduce the whole issue to the absolute bluntest terms, that is the crux. Whether a woman's consent is respected, or whether she is compelled to accept a male's hurt feelings matter more than hers.

I always try to see the argument from as many angles as i can, and sometimes I can understand the TRA points, even when disagreeing. In this instance, though, I just cannot credit people genuinely holding out that a woman who says no to a trans woman examining her due to really obvious reasons, does not have the right to say no. I still find it very hard to see how anyone can argue that position and think it is logical or ethically acceptable.

I very much hope this debate laid the issue out very clearly for people who aren't aware of the entirety of the argument.

I very much hope this debate laid the issue out very clearly for people who aren't aware of the entirety of the argument

Absolutely. They're really doing our work for us here. It's an indefensible position & them following their defeat by now calling the result transphobia/dogwhistles also shows them up as utterly unempathic and self-centred.

The TRAs can’t concede ANYTHING lest the whole house of cards come tumbling down.

@Sexnotgender

The TRAs can’t concede ANYTHING lest the whole house of cards come tumbling down.

This^

If TWAW then as women they must be allowed to examine rape victims. Anything else would mean that in fact TW aren't women.

The allies on the genderist side always make me think of Julia in 1984, who made sure she was the loudest and most enthusiastic during the two minutes hate...

Those who defend genderist bs but who are not themselves invested are covering up their own misgivings by being the most enthusiastic cheerleader.

Alternatively their intent on signalling their own moral righteousness to their tribe is really all they care about. Liberal narcissism in action.

Here's a statement I've taken from Twitter. It's carrying the SNP logo on SNP yellow background. People in the comments have queried if it's official party policy.

Mridhul Wadhwa shared it, I think others may have since deleted it. What is that app that shows deleted MPs tweets?

If I've understood correctly, 'denying transwomen the same legal protections as cis women'

• is somehow being used to suggest that a transwoman is entitled to examine a traumatised woman who has requested a female examiner? And that this amendment denies the transwoman that right?

We activists believe in the value of fairness, equality and social justice

Yes. You might. But your belief in fairness, equality and social justice doesn’t extend to women does it?

What is that app that shows deleted MPs tweets?

What is that app that shows deleted MPs tweets?

Oh FFS - sorry

What is that app that shows deleted MPs tweets?

www.politwoops.co.uk/

Many thanks!

They're saying that "sex" and "gender" mean the same thing. And will presumably say that the Bill means that women, when requesting an examiner of the female sex, can rightfully be given a transwoman?

That deleted tweets website is fascinating

"Gender" does not have the same legal meaning as sex. In the case of the Equality Act it is only relevant to the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment. Not sure what other Scottish legislation includes "gender" other than the GRA.

Also it is not the case that a GRC (which few trans people have) means you are for all purposes the opposite sex. There are clearly stated exemptions to both the GRA and the EA. These "women activists" are either deliberately misleading or misinformed.

I read that statement last night Arabella and it just encompasses everything that is wrong with critical social justice and genderist bullshit.

It makes it clear to me that the most important things are
a) engaging in activism (seemingly for it's own sake), signalling to others that this is your tribe, and lecturing the heathens (liberal narcissism as I keep saying...) and b) centering those employed by this service and their feelings, rather than the actual needs and wants of service users...it's almost as if they don't matter in all this.

"fairness, equality and social justice" they wouldn't know what that was if it came up and shook their hand...

@stationed

They're saying that "sex" and "gender" mean the same thing. And will presumably say that the Bill means that women, when requesting an examiner of the female sex, can rightfully be given a transwoman?

Yes, that is what the Labour MSP said (I forget her name, Michelle something, I think).

As far as I understand it, she's wrong, as the Equality Act makes provision for exemptions by sex in specific circumstances, I believe citing exactly this type of situation. That applies regardless of GRC.

But I suppose the EA is considered transphobic, now.

The thing that really worries me about all this is why the fuck would anyone, of any sex/gender/whatever want to traumatise and upset a victim of a sex offence? I do not get that mentality

This is the definition of the "sex" protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010:
11Sex
In relation to the protected characteristic of sex—
(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a man or to a woman;
(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons of the same sex.

This is in relation to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment:
Gender reassignment
(1)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.
(2)A reference to a transsexual person is a reference to a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
(3)In relation to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment—
(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a transsexual person;
(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to transsexual persons.

The thing, terryleather, about that accusation of it being a 'dogwhistle' is so fucking disingenuous.

This was law making. Laws must be precise, the words used must be clear and precise and understood.

I would like to see the SNP clarify whether this is an official statement of policy, or not.

Hmm, that's less clear, stationed, as I read it. It does imply that gender reassignment equals a change of sex?

@ArabellaScott

The thing, terryleather, about that accusation of it being a 'dogwhistle' is so fucking disingenuous.

This was law making. Laws must be precise, the words used must be clear and precise and understood.

I would like to see the SNP clarify whether this is an official statement of policy, or not.

Yes, I'd like to see that clarification too...

Yes, the Equality Act does seem to mix up sex and gender. It was written a long time ago (in terms of transgender arguments).

The thing that really worries me about all this is why the fuck would anyone, of any sex/gender/whatever want to traumatise and upset a victim of a sex offence? I do not get that mentality

This bothers me too. A lot.

The rights of a sex offence victim come first. What they want and what they need should come first. Their right to a choice has just been taken from them. They need to feel they have a say in what happens to their body going forward.