ScotGov Gender Reform Bill - tomorrow

[Hagiography]

Professor Sharon Cowan, Professor of Feminist and Queer Legal Studies, University of Edinburgh School of Law

Naomi Cunningham, Barrister, Outer Temple Chambers and Chair, Sex Matters

Karon Monaghan QC, Barrister, Matrix Chambers

David Parker, Lead Clinician, National Gender Identity Clinical Network for Scotland

www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-equalities-human-rights-and-civil-justice-committee/meetings/2022/ehrcjs62218/agenda

Will be screened live.

I have only watched sections of a couple of these sessions but what has struck me is that it has been a calm debate with people actually able to express their views without being heckled etc. This allows a lot of sunlight.

There is also a shocking lack of evidence/statistics and where it does exist the very small numbers I.e. 7 children given puberty blockers. It has always struck me why, given the very small numbers of trans people, are tax payer funded organisations (NHS, CS, Police, MoJ etc) so keen to put their feelings above those women and men I.e. changing language to eradicate the word woman.

There have certainly been illuminating questions where the panel have actually turned the “difficult” questions on those giving evidence e.g. who will be the cohort accessing single sex spaces if we have self ID. Response (paraphrase) We don’t know who the cohort will be, but much larger than current GRC as that is one of the complaints about the current system. Need to have legal certainty if moving away from gender dysphoria to self ID - committees role to determine. Basically if you move to self ID everyone is eligible I.e. all men can apply for one!

I've been watching the committee in the breaks between bits of work. I do love these committee meetings! Just got to the end of Sharon Cowan, Naomi Cunningham, and Karen Monaghan's bit. They are so well informed and so carefully argued. Even when I am mentally screaming "YOU ARE SO WRONG!!!" I am impressed.

The endless pussyfooting round "who is trans" was entertaining (and distrubing) The difference and the connection between being "trans" for sexual thrills and choosing a gender identity is quite an elephant in the room.

Then there was David Parker's bit. (Why are the men so much less impressive? I thought something similar in the last one I watched, the guy from LGBA was not brilliant.) "This [transition] isn't something that people are rushing into" is so much the opposite of what Sinead Watson says about her experience at the Glasgow clinic. And I wished someone had asked Sharon Cowan if her many years of research into LGBTQ included detransitioners. Don't mention the detrans!

David Parker isn't impressive because there isn't much expertise there. He has a lot of experience of political round table meetings with stuffed shirts and egos without brains.

And yet, David is the healthcare professional with direct access to Maree Todd. Interesting.

Maree Todd's the Minister for Public Health, Women's Health and Sport?

I had a few facepalm moments during David Parker's bit. He hadn't even thought that maybe they'd need to improve medical record keeping and IT to keep track of people's physical and legal sex (in the NHS's myriad incompatible systems) if more than the current tiny number were likely to need it. And I didn't think much of his claim that doubling of young people's referrals was just down to Covid - pity no-one asked if numbers doubled for both sexes (or at least I didn't hear if they did).

Couldn't she find someone more knowledgeable to talk to?

She's also, I think, got the trans clinics to sort out. So, she's got a big job.

She's an experienced politician. I'm sure she can recognise an arse from an elbow.

It's amazing to see such a lack of elbows in these submissions - who was it who made up the list of people to give evidence? The bias is so bad I can see it from Mumsnet.

Interesting to watch Pam Duncan Smith. Peaking in real time, I reckon.

Sorry, meant Duncan Glancy.

Got her muddled up with a male tory MP there. Oops.

I missed today's committee hearing - is there a transcript?

You can still watch it here www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/equalities-human-rights-and-civil-justice-committee-june-14-2022

Very many thanks, Respect - will try and catch up tomorrow.

Transcript won't be out until tomorrow.

I don't think Pam Duncan Glancy is peaking. She's savvy enough to ask questions and be seen to be finding the answers interesting or helpful but she won't change her starting point. On the issue today of finding a toilet when out and about she was quick to say it must be most difficult for trans people, even over and above the difficulties she faces as a wheelchair user.

He was absolutely appalling, couldn’t really hear a word and I was in the same room. I think he is a mental health nurse with a new job title. I also think he is a complete fool.
It was interesting to me how all the women in the viewing area were wearing trousers, however guess who in the viewing area was wearing dresses...?
Naomi & Karon were brilliant, elevated the whole debate with their clear, confident, intelligent comments and it was fantastic to see Maggie 🤡Chapman completely out of her depth yet again 😂

Just started watching after the break. The man from GIDS says that there is an open door to those needing support. But nobody asked about support after medical interventions that go wrong, or for detransitioners. It would be wonderful if all mental health support was as well funded as this, for people supposedly without a mental health problem. Doesn’t know anything about gynecology services….

guess who in the viewing area was wearing dresses...

I once read something that reasoned wearing jeans is a cis privilege because the nature of jeans means that you have to buy them to fit your anatomy (pelvic girdle, hips, angle of your thighs) and skirts/dresses do a better job of concealing inconvenient anatomy.

I once read something that reasoned wearing jeans is a cis privilege because the nature of jeans means that you have to buy them to fit your anatomy (pelvic girdle, hips, angle of your thighs) and skirts/dresses do a better job of concealing inconvenient anatomy.

I've read a lot of nonsense in my time too... Unless they are skin tight, jeans cover a multitude of inconvenient anatomical facts.

Official report is out now: www.parliament.scot/api/sitecore/CustomMedia/OfficialReport?meetingId=13823

Thank you Betsy.

Peter Parker, the nurse who gave evidence - does anyone know where he is based? I can't find where he works or what his qualifications are - which seems odd.

There wasn't a counter argument to his evidence, and he said things which I raised an eyebrow at - I work in Glasgow (not at the Sandyord) and I don't think they have a children's service at that location, so how does he know what the service provision or usage is? I'd not know those figures for my service and I'm pretty senior.

I thought I might try and meet him to talk about the concerns I have in my own field with trying to accommodate gender so if anyone knows if he's a clinician or something else I'd be pleased of some signposting.

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria He's David Parker so should be findable e.g. in ths report:

www.gov.scot/publications/national-gender-identity-healthcare-reference-group-minutes-march-2022/

he's listed as "David Parker, Lead Clinician, National Gender Identity Clinical Network for Scotland"

The NGICNS website has been taken down - presumably since the Eunuch thing.

uk.linkedin.com/in/david-parker-3b4a8a169

This submission has been made public in advance of next weeks hearings. The more I understand about the motives of some individuals, the more I see arguments like this as wholly anti-woman, possibly even misogynist. There has been no consideration for women at all.

www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-equalities-human-rights-and-civil-justice-committee/correspondence/2022/briefing-note-from-robin-white-on-ehrc-guidance

Completely moderate input there from RMW.

This a shockingly poor piece of work and lends credibility to the suggestion that the EHRC, under the anti-trans regime established by Chair Kishwer Falkner and the recently-appointed Commissioners have lost many of the experienced and committed staff. That would also be supported by the banana skin related to disability and long Covid that the EHRC also slipped on recently.
How should service providers and users respond to this awful, dangerous piece of nonsense from what was once a highly respected government agency and is rapidly becoming a laughing stock?

Written by RMW - this weekend could be a laugh now after all!

For anybody who wants to read more about some matters raised in that briefing note.

www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2021/05/10/aea-v-ehrc-an-explanation/

sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/making-sense-of-the-ehrc-judicial

Update: sex-matters.org/posts/updates/case-law-sss/

This a shockingly poor piece of work [...[

Thanks, RMW, I couldn't have described your efforts better myself.

Good grief! RMW uses "recently-appointed" in the same sentence that I criticised above. Someone should tell her that New Hart's Rules says: "Do not hyphenate adjectival compounds where the first element is an adverb ending in -ly". (An exception is "newly-wed" used as a noun, which is often hyphenated.)