Heartbreaking column in today's Scotsman

[howonearthdidwegethere]

Columnist Susan Dalgety reflecting on the words of the Cabinet Minister Shona Robison in the Scottish Parliament last week.

www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/abusive-men-will-exploit-proposed-new-gender-recognition-law-susan-dalgety-3596504

Shame on Robison and Sturgeon. Traitors to their sex. How do they sleep at night?

The other thing about this statement - "there's no evidence that predatory and abusive men ever had to pretend to be anything else, to carry out such behaviour" - is that it basically says if you didn't pick up on it then that's your fault.

It's not only the fact there's a roll call of men pretending all sorts to commit sexual abuse, rape and murder, but it's the fact that if you didn't see them for what they are, and you're raped or murdered, well that's your fault!

It's unbelievable really.

JK

'The most searing, heartfelt and courageous response yet to @ShonaRobison's astounding claim in the Scottish parliament that there is no evidence sexual predators 'have ever had to pretend to be anything else'. Susan, as a fellow survivor, I salute you.'

twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1500196714845716484?cxt=HHwWiICymde94tEpAAAA

@mudgetastic

Yea it would

1; evidence is that traswomen offend at the male rate not the female rate

1. Ignoring that , enabling men to access single sex spaces increases the attack space . As evident from the differences in attacks in sports centres that have mixed sec facilities compared to the sports centres with single sex facilities

Self if enables men to acces single sex spaces . Because bad men do bad things

So let’s take a moment to pick this apart.

(1) What evidence?

(2) Access to spaces is an Equality Act matter, not GRA and so currently based on self-declaration.

(3) So how do you suggest that GRA reform will make any difference?

(1) What evidence?

Look at the statistics for the number of transwomen in prison and their offences.

(2) Access to spaces is an Equality Act matter, not GRA and so currently based on self-declaration.

The MoJ's policy for housing prisoners makes a distinction between those with and without a GRC. Prisoners are placed initially in the prison estate corresponding to their legally recognised sex.

(3) So how do you suggest that GRA reform will make any difference?

See answers to 1 and 2.

Lawyers other than Robin also think having a GRC creates a higher bar in the "case by case" nature of Equality Act discrimination claims.

There is a case where an MTF prisoner without a GRC claimed discrimination because they were not given the "womanly" accoutrements they demanded, and this was not granted because they didn't have a GRC. So there is case law.

filia.org.uk/latest-news/2018/8/23/has-everyone-really-got-it-wrong

Plus if all males can declare themselves women and many do the definition of woman will be even more watered down.

So don't be fooled. There is a reason that the TRAs want this seemingly inconsequential "simple, administrative change" so much.

In other words, where a person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment but does not have a GRC, their comparator class in looking at a discrimination claim is other members of their birth sex who are not proposing reassignment. Once they do have a GRC, their comparator class is members of their acquired sex.

This means that if the GRA is amended so that self-declaration is all that is needed, Green would have had the comparator class of females rather than males and would have had a good case not just for access to the tights, wigs, prosthetic vagina and sanitary towels sought, but also for removal to the women’s estate, because the comparator class would become females. Whilst Green was disqualified for want of a dysphoria diagnosis, the comparator class remained males.

From Julian Norman's article which I linked.

Evidence.

Some stats here:

www.womenarehuman.com/sexual-offending-per-capita-female-male-and-transgender-both-sexes/

Actually, Robin, this data does suggest a slight difference between offending rates of male offenders and transgender offenders (of both sexes).

The rate is still far, far higher than the female rate, by an order of magnitude:

'The sexual offender per capita of the transgender population (both sexes) is some 35-90 times higher than that of the female population (and a little below that of the male population).

More data and analysis here:

fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-prisoners/

Both of these articles mention some of the difficulties presented by the fact that data is not recorded by sex and that someone with a GRC is counted/recorded as their chosen sex, which will obviously affect the stats.

@OldCrone

(1) What evidence?

Look at the statistics for the number of transwomen in prison and their offences.

(2) Access to spaces is an Equality Act matter, not GRA and so currently based on self-declaration.

The MoJ's policy for housing prisoners makes a distinction between those with and without a GRC. Prisoners are placed initially in the prison estate corresponding to their legally recognised sex.

(3) So how do you suggest that GRA reform will make any difference?

See answers to 1 and 2.

(1) I am aware of those statistics. You can’t jump from that to a generalisation about mare v trans women stats. Apples and oranges.

(2) ‘Initially’. I understand the assessment now takes about 24-48 hours. So not much of a difference, if any, given that most prisoners undergo a ‘reception’ process over this time.

As you say, see answers 1 and 2 above.

‘Male’ not ‘mare’. Grrr predictive text!

@DomesticatedZombie

Evidence.

Some stats here:

www.womenarehuman.com/sexual-offending-per-capita-female-male-and-transgender-both-sexes/

Actually, Robin, this data does suggest a slight difference between offending rates of male offenders and transgender offenders (of both sexes).

The rate is still far, far higher than the female rate, by an order of magnitude:

'The sexual offender per capita of the transgender population (both sexes) is some 35-90 times higher than that of the female population (and a little below that of the male population).

More data and analysis here:

fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-prisoners/

Both of these articles mention some of the difficulties presented by the fact that data is not recorded by sex and that someone with a GRC is counted/recorded as their chosen sex, which will obviously affect the stats.

I’m aware of those stats. But you attempt to use them to make generalisations about wider populations. Which do not follow.

It would be nice if you would consider a generalisation about the female population, Robin.

All females have been in a sexually threatening situation with a male. Many of us were just girls when a man sexually threatened us.

Which is why we want to have some spaces where people who are male, regardless of how that male person perceives themselves, are not.

Why does your wish to be included trump my need to exclude you?

(3) So how do you suggest that GRA reform will make any difference?

What is your answer to this question Robin?

What difference will GRA reform make? What do you see as the purpose of reforming the GRA so that anyone can become legally recognised as the opposite sex?

Did you just write " I am aware that the data exists showing the difference between women and transwomen as offenders but I believe that that data is not relevant "

Because????

@OldCrone

(3) So how do you suggest that GRA reform will make any difference?

What is your answer to this question Robin?

What difference will GRA reform make? What do you see as the purpose of reforming the GRA so that anyone can become legally recognised as the opposite sex?

It's Schrodinger's Reform, @OldCrone - of HUGE importance on which the entire status and wellbeing of the trans community rests 'v' of no consequence at all, just a bit of admin, won't impact on anyone other than an individual who likes their paperwork to be neat and tidy.

@RobinMoiraWhite -you said

I’m aware of those stats. But you attempt to use them to make generalisations about wider populations. Which do not follow.

Do you point that out to all the people who insist transgender individuals are at a higher risk of suicide? Because that statistic is based on a very small survey of self selecting individuals and has been proven to be wrong.

Just wondering 🤔 if it's only us women that you correct?

I’m aware of those stats. But you attempt to use them to make generalisations about wider populations. Which do not follow.

You asked for evidence relating to criminal offending.

I (and others) have provided precisely that.

Presumably campaigners aren’t going to stop once Self ID has been brought in. I wonder how long before activists start campaigning hard to remove the exceptions in the equality act? The whole thing is a slippery slope with the start point pretending self id is just an admin exercise and the end point being the complete removal of women’s spaces, services, sports and female specific language. The idea that activists will be happy with their lives after self id is preposterous.

The start point was enacting the GRA in the first place. It should never be possible for a historical document to be changed to conceal someone's sex.

The start point was enacting the GRA in the first place. It should never be possible for a historical document to be changed to conceal someone's sex.

And now that we have same-sex marriage and the pension age has been equalised, there are no remaining reasons for its existence.

Robin maintains that it doesn't affect access to single-sex spaces, so there are no arguments there that transactivists could use for its continued existence, since it apparently doesn't help trans people in any way.

The only sensible way forward is repeal of the GRA.

@OldCrone what happens if the GRA is repealed?

People can get married if they wish, so doesn't affect that.

Would be harder to hide previous crimes.

What's the issue with repealing it and starting again?

@OldCrone

The start point was enacting the GRA in the first place. It should never be possible for a historical document to be changed to conceal someone's sex.

And now that we have same-sex marriage and the pension age has been equalised, there are no remaining reasons for its existence.

Robin maintains that it doesn't affect access to single-sex spaces, so there are no arguments there that transactivists could use for its continued existence, since it apparently doesn't help trans people in any way.

The only sensible way forward is repeal of the GRA.

Data rights; the right to marry as one's affirmed sex; how one is regarded when reporting a death, tax and social security records and so on - there re a number of other examples. There is quite a long list where the GRA is still of considerable relevance. Whilst some government agencies will change documents (driving license, passport gender marker) with lesser forms of identification, some still require a birth certificate.

So it is wrong to say a GRA doesnt help trans people.

But why should anyone have the right to be recorded as something they are not ?

I mean a certificate doesn't actually change your sex 😅

am aware of those statistics. You can’t jump from that to a generalisation about mare v trans women stats. Apples and oranges

In what way are they apples and oranges? Male people who identify as women display similar patterns of criminality with other males. Males commit 98%+ of all sexual offences, so why would it be a surprise that some males who identify as women also commit such crimes?

Sex is a material fact that is recorded at birth.

'gender' is a personal, inner sense that is really nothing to do with sex as far as I can tell, and has no bearing on medical treatment, etc.

So what is the point of recording gender at all?

Sex is what matters. And sex is immutable.

@RobinMoiraWhite what about the HARM that having a legal fiction on paperwork does to trans people?

What is the benefit of e.g. having "female" on medical records so that when a person with a big belly and a beard and abdominal pain presents in A+E says "I'm a trans man" the nurse doesn't pick up on the implications of that because the medical records said "M"? By the time anyone realised that the patient was actually female, or that the pain was from labour from a cryptic pregnancy - the infant had died.

If the medical records were correct the first thing a triage nurse would have excluded would have been pregnancy.

Facts are facts, sex is sex, and muddling up paperwork has serious consequences.

That baby died, and it should not have died. There are multiple examples of harm being done because of the wrong sex marker on medical records. I'm sure you're aware of them.

Who benefits from getting delayed or inadequate medical care?