Nicola Sturgeon is on Radio 4 now. She's said that her gender reform won't make any difference

[Clymene]

Transwomen aren't men. Very tiny numbers of people.

She's such a bloody liar.

Some extracts:

The current process is stigmatising and traumatic. If anyone seeks to misuse the process, they'd be committing a criminal offence.

Individual risk assessments.

Abusive men are a risk to women, we shouldn't seek to be further stigmatise and discriminate against a tiny tiny minority.

Many threats to women. Real feminists should be focusing on them.

I really, really dislike her.

So commit rape get arrested, claim to be a woman, sent to a women’s prison where you have a captive population of women to rape at your leisure.

It reminds me of how in olden days nobles would create hunting parks from which their quarry could not escape to be assured of a successful hunt every time.

Remember the trans identifying man in a sari provides services to women in City of Edinburgh AND East Lothian Council and Midlothian. The numbers of women who are not getting services are HUGE.

I really think that phrase 'live as a woman ' is what clearly shows this up as total nonsense. I live as a woman because I am biologically a woman, as does every other biological woman. Please can anyone who thinks we are being unreasonable or attacking NS unfairly give a definition of how a biological man can 'live as a woman ' which does not reduce the word 'woman' to stereotypes and exclude every woman who does not conform to those stereotypes?

This thread is about Sturgeon & what she said on Radio 4 , but there are many other MSPs & MPs in this; Patrick Harvie, Maggie Chapman, John Nicholson, Karen Adam, Joe Fitzpatrick, Mhairi Black to name just a few of the cheer leaders who are attempting to destroy women’s rights in Scotland.
Believe me, we women up here don’t just exercise our right to criticize Sturgeon, we criticize those who cannot see the damage that will arise from this bill.

If only world leaders could understand that abusive men will, and frequently do, exploit any possible loophole to further abuse.
But apparently thinking skills are a non requirement to run a country.

Shirley-Anne Somerville, who is the minister for education, is another full on TWAW no debate person. Heaven help our schools.
I thought Nicola was great. I voted for independence, joined the SNP and thought she did so well at the start of covid compared to Boris.
I left the SNP over this issue and will never vote for them again while this remains their policy. Dh also resigned his membership.
I have yet to see NS actually address any of the concerns people have about women's rights being eroded. She just restates her point. There's no argument behind it, presumably as she doesn't have one.

Ah but there will be a case-by-case risk assessment, no doubt.

I'd love to hear exactly what criteria is used. Is it 'passing', surgery, specific offence?

But you never, ever get that far. The details aren't available.

If you are in Scotland please write to your MSPs & MPs and tell them your concerns. If you are outside Scotland, you can still raise your concerns with your MPs, every email, letter and phone all helps.

But @RhannionKPSS - writing to my MSP is pointless. And my MP. Pointless. Because they are SNP and toe the party line. They are simply not allowed to disagree, whatever their personal feelings.

We had first hand experience over the Covid "blended learning" thing, when my kids were being offered 2 days a fortnight I emailed about 30 MSPs and MPs and Councillors and everyone I could think of because I was so enraged. Those that bothered to reply from the SNP just copied and pasted the same stock response which boiled down to "Nicola knows what she's doing, isn't she fantastic".

It's not pointless @FamilyTreeBuilder - every commuication is FOI-able.

The more letters they get the less they can ignore us. It won't stop the GRA changes going through, but, it will make the next stage easier.

Which means that when they come out the line "this wasn't an issue among my constituents", and politicians do hide behind this, it can be shown to be a lie.

Yep, responses from MSPs have been pretty poor but writing again just now is really important. Every email adds to the numbers and adds to the pressure - it ain't over til the fat non-lady sings!

FWS have covered the main points that no-one seems to have answers for, with some suggested text for letters. Please write to all eight of your MSPs and ask them not to vote for the Bill on the 27th.

forwomen.scot/06/10/2022/gender-recognition-reform-bill-stage-1-action/

Its appalling that they ignored you, I’m sorry. Please do contact them, it’s not a waste. They can’t then say “ it’s not an issue with my constituents” every letter & email proves that it is an issue for women and children in Scotland.

Hmm, mine include Christine Jardine, Lorna Slater and Alex Cole-Hamilton.
Zero chance of changing any of their minds, though I can still write as a protest I suppose.

Please do. It’s not a waste of time as they cannot turn round later I say” we didn’t know”

It's never pointless.
They cannot say they didnt know, when the shit hits the fan they will all plead ignorance.
We have to make that evidently not true.
Send emails, write to papers, write letters, do any damn thing you can think of to make sure they bloody knew but still went ahead.
When finally critical mass hits I want all those who knew but said nothing to pay for this.

I was going to take the bait, but really what's the point?

Clearly there are societal norms and expectations around how women and men present themselves in society, and there are commonly-understood differences. For example, the vast majority of people who use the first name Fiona are women, and those who use Derek are men. To this extent, calling yourself Fiona can be construed as "living as a woman" in that regard at least.

But if your argument is that a woman who calls herself Peter, wears traditionally male clothing, goes to football matches, ticks the "m" box on forms, uses he/his pronouns, refuses to accept they are a woman etc etc etc is actually "living as a woman" because of owning a vagina - then there's no point in a discussion.

Reductio ad absurdum.

BTW I loathe Nicola Sturgeon and vehemently oppose the Scottish reforms.

please write to them also ask them to ask questions of ministers... if they dont do that and give you a resonable explanation of WHY they won't then you can report them to parliamentary standards

Yes if I call myself david and wear mens clothes ( and do stereotypical mens things ) I am still a woman

I am stuck with brests and a general body shape that mean no man could look at me and not know I am a woman

I am stuck with a female biology which affects how strong I can possibly be

I would be stuck with female biology that could have direct importance to medical treatment

So yes I would still be a woman
Everyone would still know that

If I thought that changing my name and clothes could magically change how sexist people view me I'd still be doing it ( and that line is a key part of all this - it's the sexism ain't it )

As it is I use a female name ( although when foreign colleagues replaced it with a male one I never corrected them ) and tend ( but not exclusively) to wear female clothes because they fit - you can't buy a bra for men and mens pants have excess fabric

Pretending that women and men are fundamentally brain as opposed to body different is so fucking insulting - it's a type of stereotype thinking that I have spent my entire life having to fight

• both externally - the world who didn't think o could do certain things because I have a womens brain
• but also internally when I wanted to take a razor blade to my developing body

But if your argument is that a woman who calls herself Peter, wears traditionally male clothing, goes to football matches, ticks the "m" box on forms, uses he/his pronouns, refuses to accept they are a woman etc etc etc is actually "living as a woman"

Aside from your references to pronouns/box ticking, which is a very modern addition to proceedings, there have been many, many women who've lived like that through the ages and not felt they weren't 'living as a woman'.

What they'd take issue with is the idea that they would 'refuse to accept they are a woman'. Instead they'd 'refuse to accept they have to adhere to cultural stereotypes of womanhood'.

I listened to the committee presentations and about the only thing everyone on all sides seemed to agree on was that the 3 months "living as a woman" bit was pointless.

Well it wasn't meant as a trap, but you have taken the bait because you are giving meaning to the phrase 'living as a woman '. Of course 'Peter' is not living as a woman. They simply are a woman. I am not a woman because of my name, clothes, hobbies or feelings. It's only biology. A woman is a female body with any personality! I have no problem with inner feelings but there are practical implications. What if Peter goes to hospital in pain. They say they are a man, their driving licence says they are a man, their partner says 'he'. What if the fact that they are suffering from an ectopic pregnancy is over looked because the doctors do not assume that they need to look at Peter's genitals to check their biology. I am all for women playing football and being astronauts, men wearing dresses and being sensitive. I just think that we should have the freedom to break out of societal norms and stereotypes without needing to lie about our biology.

If the reforms "won't make any difference" there is no point in making them.

She should leave the law as it stands.

@Datun, no need to search for me, thank you. 😊 I know exactly what you are referring to.

Ah! That's a different one, and yes, down South.
There's an awful lot of it about.