That's Nicola telt.

[WandaWomblesaurus]

https://twitter.com/oceanbreathcafe/status/1597652609250119681?s=46&t=r0rB0VUPxPN48APJwhS_kg

I know she's been mentioned on another thread but flowers please for this brave woman.

Actually I want to capitalise Marvellous Heckler Woman.

Superhero.

Seeing those people applaud when the woman was removed made me feel sick. Knowing these people are in positions of power to protect women and yet think like this, makes my blood run cold. WTF is Stugeon doing? It's not just Lunacy. She isn't stupid so I can't help but think it's deliberate and that's really terrifying. And those people support this.

Why, if Sturgeon believes she's a feminist and supporter of child rights, are children routinely forced to spend time alone with dangerous men using it to further abuse their mothers, and why after so many years in power, are prosecution rates so disgustingly low for pedos and rapists. Fuck free baby boxes for affluent families, how about the SNP actually try to protect women and children.

This thread has reminded me to put my order in for a ministry of tartan suffragette scarf.

Stellar woman and shame on the handmaidens.

Brave woman. I applaud her and hope she continues to fight with us against this dangerous shit. Courage calls to courage. Except in that room.

The truth is this:

1. Evidence was provided in many of the thousands of written submissions to the consultation. By deciding to hold oral evidence hearings before the consultation responses could be analysed, the Committee deprived itself of the chance to get the information they said they wanted but didn't receive.

1. Several groups asked to be included in the hearings who sought to provide evidence of harms and concerns, but the Committee claimed they did not have time to hear them. Most notably this included five female survivers of male violence who sought to provide evidence of the impact of self-id policies on VAWAG services and the survivors who are forced to self-exclude from those services if they cannot be provided on a female-only basis st point of delivery. The Committee deprived itself of the chance to hear evidence of harms and concerns by refusing to hear these women.

1. Several witnesses at the hearings did raise concerns, but those concerns were dismissed as theoretical because they were raised by women's rights campaigners rather than affected women themselves, with witnesses supporting self-id simply denying those concerns by claiming there was no evidence. In this case the Committee chose to ignore the concerns raised. Although it did, in fact, contradict itself in acknowledging that they had been raised but then noted in the report that they ruled the concerns about impacts on women and children as "out of scope" for the purposes of the Bill.

1. For the hearings, witnesses are typically asked to prepare statements about particular things and as one witness pointed out afterwards, had they been asked to provide oral evidence about harms and abuses of self-id, they could have done so, but those were not the questions the Committee wanted to explore. However, the witness also noted that they had written to the Committee several times and well before the report was drafted providing the requested evidence in writing, like many others did.

So the claim that no evidence could be provided is flat out wrong.

I see that the screenshot in the quote didn't post - it was RMW quoting the Committee report's claim that no evidence of harms and abuses of self-id had been provided to the Committee.

It's a nonsensical concept anyway. There's no way of telling who's lieing when they only evidence you're 'really' transgender is that you say so.

@Hooverphobe Thanks for your post. I had no idea about the Ministry of Tartan suffragette scarf and have now placed an order.

Someone who has been hounded off twitter used to have a pinned tweet of herself cycling past the presidential car as Nicola was getting out (I think it was by the botanical gardens) and her shouting "Women won't wheesht Nicola" as she passed. The FM's eyes opened wide as she gawped at the cyclist.
I loved that tweet.

It certainly follows her around.

@applesandpears33 subversive AND warm! 🙏

Just saw this excellent piece by MBM -

murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2022/11/30/theres-no-evidence-a-titanic-error/

RMW - the er... renowned legal expert: www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2021/09/02/a-practical-guide/

That is excellent! If only I weren't banned by Twitter.

Thank you Waitwhat

How at a Zero Tolerance event can you tolerate silencing women on a matter relating to VAWG? How at a Zero Tolerance event can you tell feminists to shut it?
They really need to change their name to Total Subjagation.

She thinks making it a criminal offence to lie about being transgender before getting a GRC is enough of a deterrent

How can you tell if a person is lying or not when the only 'proof' is their word?
A man claiming he's a women is already lying because it's an impossibility.

'Living as a woman' means nothing but performances of the sexist stereotypes these men think apply to us.

Good job that woman

Thanks, that is excellent.

Until I saw that clip where they all cheer I thought maybe their silence was a sign they agree but were scared.

Well that cheering just shows how captured the VAWG movement is. Did you see when the speaker talked about the rape and death threats she has had from men who identify as women, and that women at the table just shakes her head. Just shakes away the first hand account of male pattern violence against a woman. And she's working in the VAWG sector. Just shocking.

And when the ZT woman says the event has to be safe for all women and they all cheer, she meant men,. She meant 'we thought it was really important that any men at this VAWG event feel safe. That is our priority. And if that means stopping women from talking about VAWG, at a VAWG events then so be it.'

How can they not see themselves?

Or "Zero Tolerance for Women's Rights"?

Is there going to be a rally at Scot Parl during the 3rd hearing? My mother is 87 and used to knit a lot for us when we were kids. She now has poor eyesight and arthritc hands and hasnt knitted in years. I told her about the GRA protests and that I wanted a scarf. Ladies, she is now the proud possessor of large needles and chunky green,white and violet wool. Watch this space!

This whole ‘making it a criminal offence to lie about being transgender’ is actually really concerning.
Sounds to me like it’s criminalising detransitioners.
And then lo and behold - 100 percent transition success. No one ever has retreats (because if they do they get arrested) It’s bollocks

Go your mum! 👏😊

Thank you for sharing the MBM link.

Like the Mermaids situation... it's all built on obfustication, overlooking, ignoring, closing eyes to and sometimes flat out lying to try and force something through against evidence and clear knowledge of harms to others. This is a pattern. And in someone taking a wage for a public service role it is a wholly unacceptable failure of duty. We cannot have people in office not capable of being objective and considering evidence. We cannot have people in office who can just ignore and refuse to acknowledge the existence of the bits of reality they don't want to deal with. It's fundamental unfitness for such a post.

And yes, criminalising false declaration is nuts because if we've learned anything about this its how mission creep and boundaries never work on any of this crap. How is a gender confused child supposed to safely be supported to consider their options, who they are, take the time and how do people detransition if they reach the point of needing to change? What about people like Bunce and the police officer who present as different sexes on different days?

This is constantly trying to plug a collapsing dam. This is never going to work, it will never be made to work, it is only a matter of time before it falls and in the meantime women will pay and pay and pay and pay for this arrogance and misogynistic subordination of them to male interests and agendas.

What will work is that any adult can be who they want, as they want, when they want and be protected from all discrimination and prejudice for doing so. They can be free to identify and be fluid and be themselves, and additional to and different from services and provisions can and should be developed. But no one changes sex, sex is a fixed, separate fact to gender, single sex spaces are to be retained and respected, and no male should ever be in a defined, single sex female space where their presence prevents female people from having access and equality. That is the line that Nicola et al will eventually have to face.

There is a link within the text in this link (posted by Waitwhat23 at 07.57 this morning) to a SPS policy document dated 2014 but I wanted to point out that work on this policy began in 2007, that's how long the push for self ID has been going on. Work on self ID began just 3 years after the 2004 GRA. The TRA's had a big head start, there is a lot to undo.

murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2022/04/06/the-sps-review-on-trans-prisoners-a-chance-to-get-policy-making-in-scottish-prisons-back-on-track/